Jump to content

Home

IRAQ - What should President Bush do?

Commander Bond

By Commander Bond
in Senate Chambers

IRAQ - What should President Bush do?  

34 members have voted

  1. 1. IRAQ - What should President Bush do?

    • Attack Iraq in a full-out blaze, killing Sadam Hussain and taking control.
      7
    • Give Hans Blix and the Weapons Inspectors more time.
      12
    • Listen to France and Germany, adopting their signed treaty on peace.
      2
    • Send in 'special forces' disguised as Weapons Inspectors and assassinate Sadam Hussain.
      6
    • Pull all American armed forces out of Iraq and forget about the whole thing.
      1
    • Wait for the UN to sort things out.
      6

Recommended Posts

Commander Bond Newbie

Commander Bond

Posted
Posted

I live in the good ol' sunny country of England. Watching, reading and listening to the endless news reels, programmes and debates on the television, in the newspapers and on the radio, I can't help developing my own opinions of what is now called "War on Iraq."

 

So I'm asking you, where-ever you are, what the main man should do. George W Bush seems to have his finger tightly squeezed around the trigger for all-out war, but what would be the best corse of action to ensure world safety?

 

Please vote, or post another corse of action if I miss something (which I usually do).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Katarn07 Newbie

Katarn07

Posted
Posted

I voted the first one. There are fake Saddams, so once one is dead, the special forces guys are done for. Better to send in the armed services to deal with him like we did in Desert Storm. Only kill Saddam this time. Big mistake not too last time. Lots of crap happening now wouldn't if we had. (Sep 11 would have, yes, I know...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Katarn07 Newbie

Katarn07

Posted
Posted

OK. I am totally against the whole, listening to the French and Germans. they're aren't being peaceful. Their just wussin out.

 

Hey, France! We saved your butts in WWI and WWII, and now that no one is bugging you, and we are under the threat of attacks from Saddam and want to neutralize the threat, what do you do?! Yeah, that's what I thought. You too, Germany... I have always been aggravated with France for their history of wars, but now with Germany, I am really pissed off.

 

(No offence to the French and German users of this message board, by the way.)

 

Oh, and allowing the inspectors more time might be alright, but Saddam is moving them all over and we know he's been making them over the past 10 years. He is nearing completion of his nuclear bomb with all his money, probably, so I am sure it'd be best to stick with the first option.

 

(ANd Commander Bond, if special forces were as succesful as Bond is, I'd vote with you, but I said why that might not be best above)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commander Bond Newbie

Commander Bond

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well done, Darklighter, some very bold comments. I do agree with you, the Americans are a tiny bit too patriotic. Fair enough, love your country, but don't go nuts, eh?

 

Interesting poinst of view so far... going in and destroying everything would probably incite World War Three, to be honest. The French, Germans and Russians have all pledged against war, so they will be angry with America and Great Britain (I'm ashamed to say it, but it looks like us Brits are being pulled in by Bush). Iraq has many allies throughout the middle-east who have enough power to start their own war.

 

Do you think it's about oil, and what President Bush could get out of the counrty he invades? I mean, look at it:

 

Iraq - pleanty of oil and resorces that could prove useful. Sadam a tiny bit evil but not threatening America outright.

 

Korea - "We have nuclear weapons!" but no resorces like oil. President Bush is un-interested, funnily enough.

 

Also, could it be to do with the fact that George W has promised his father, Big George ex-President Bush, that he will clean up his mess left behind after the last attack on Sadam Hussain? Coming up with a link between Al Quaida (spelling anyone?), Osama bin Laden and Sadam is a rather weak excuse to attack when your troops have been stationed on Iraq's boarder for several months, eh?

 

I'm not sure, but in the words of Hans Blix himself, "We need more time!" to find out what will happen.

 

Get James Bond 007 to infiltrate Iraq and assassinate Sadam, that's what I say... but then, I am English...

 

:007:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mace_sundancer Newbie

mace_sundancer

Posted
Posted

give me an M-16 and an airborne insertion and i'll sort it out...

 

 

the thing that p1sses me off is this 'give peace a chance' crad and 'war never solves anything' and calling bush and blair murderers... we've given peace a chance and it's got us nowhere. and tell a survivor of the holocaust war solves nothing. or someone from halabja. oh wait, no hussein killed everyone there didn't he? and bush and blair are not murderers. they want to help save the poor innocent iraqis who are being murdered, tortured and starving at the hands of a megalomaniac tyrant. [/rant mode off]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Katarn07 Newbie

Katarn07

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by Commander Bond

Get James Bond 007 to infiltrate Iraq and assassinate Sadam, that's what I say... but then, I am English...

:007:

 

I'm American, if there were guys like Bond, sure, send them in!

 

Ummm, there is no option for Korea. I say do the same thing. And yes, I would be willing to take an M-16 and go to either country to do what I'm ordered to...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commander Bond Newbie

Commander Bond

Posted
  • Author
Posted

KATARN07, I'm about to pick thgouh our last post!

 

You think you're so big and clever, don't you? Try taking a few history lessons before you slag off other countries.

 

You did not save France in World War One and World War Two. The people saved themselves, with the help of the D-Day landings from... oh, that's right: Great Britain! The Nazi Armed Forces may have had France occupied, but the people put up a resistance movement and helped the British soldiers from the inside work their way through and push the Nazi's out. You sent, oh, about five boatloads of troops. Thanks for your massive support.

As for World War One (in fact, just like World War Two), you sat back on your fat butts enjoying your lovely counrty when, all of a sudden, someone attacks you! Time for you to join in, eh? Well done for finally noticing a World War in progress!!!

 

Sorry... trying to find a peaceful solution to a world crisis is, what did you call it, "wussin out"? Oh, so now trying to save innocent lives both in Iraq and all across the world is just ignoring the problem, is it? Very funny. Your solution will kill, injure and destroy thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent men, women and children. Think about other people before going into your "America Rules!" mode.

 

Saddam Hussain has a nuclear bomb, nearly completed, and has been playing hide and seek with Hans Blix, has he? Got any evidence anyone? Nope, didn't think so. You've been listening to your propoganda for too long, my friend. George W Bush will say anything for a chance to flex his powerful muscles and show the world what America can do... more-like show the world how many lives America can wipe out in a day. What you think Saddam is doing sounds more like the storyline for the next James Bond film, honestly.

 

You may well be very patriotic, Katarn07. But try thinking about other people before you attack with all guns blazing. After all, although Iraq is your target, there are hundreds of thousands of innocent people over there who will just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time... and get a bullet in the brain. Try seeing the bigger picture (and take history classes again).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commander Bond Newbie

Commander Bond

Posted
  • Author
Posted

How dare you try and rope Prime Minister Tony Blair into this crisis with George W Bush?!? Blair himself has been in talks with France and Germany to try and solve Iraq's problems peacefully. The only talks he has attended with your President is to warn George Dubyah that war and violence can only be met with more violence.

 

The anti-war protesters throughout the world on Saturday gave a clear message, and Tony Blair has acknowledged this message: "War is not the answer, and we are looking all the time for a peaceful, non-violent solution to the crisis. However, if one does not arise, then we must be prepared for the worst."

 

See? "IF ONE DOES NOT ARISE!" We are pro-peace in Iraq and over this crisis. The only reason our 25th Brigade is out there now is to show support for the case against Saddam Hussain, and if fighting starts our tropos will not go in unless ordered to by Blair and Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II herself(authority comes from the top in our country).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commander Bond Newbie

Commander Bond

Posted
  • Author
Posted

How dare you?!?

 

Do you know who the real tyrant is, the real evil dictator? His name is not Saddam Hussain, nor is it Osama bin Laden... no, it's spelt George W Bush.

 

That's just my two pence, but I think that with everyone else here and all over the world who agrees with me could turn that two pence into two million pounds... British Sterling.

 

Rule Britannia and long live the Queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toonces Newbie

Toonces

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by Commander Bond

Do you know who the real tyrant is, the real evil dictator? His name is not Saddam Hussain, nor is it Osama bin Laden... no, it's spelt George W Bush.

 

Wow, what a completely outrageous statement. You are extremely misguided my friend.

 

This post has gotten way off topic. Take your propaganda to the Senate. The Swamp is not the place to discuss your political ideology

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reborn Outcast Newbie

Reborn Outcast

Posted
Posted

Yea take it to the Senate...

 

I voted give the inspectors more time because going in there full blaze would enrage the world at us.

 

And Commander Bond, that is one messed up statement considering what Osama and Sadam and all them have done... I think you need to reconsider your values of a "tyrant" because if torturing people, killing people in cold blood, having the sons of top officials test your food for drugs so as to keep loyalty among the troops (this is what Sadam does) and hijacking planes and flying them into buildings is not your idead of a tyrant, you have some messed up values.

 

And lol no offense but your queen is just there for show... she holds no "real" power. (Trust me on this one.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JediNyt Newbie

JediNyt

Posted
Posted

There is too much controversy and too much suspicion over this whole thing. I dont really know what to think anymore. Its hard to trust what anyone says. Most of the world is saying to not go to war and to let the UN do its job and exhaust all possibilities of peace. That seems like the most logical answer. I want the Iraqi people to live and prosper and I want Hussein gone. I know that rushing in guns blazing is not a good idea for either side. So I guess Ill keep my faith in the UN and people like Collin Powell (Secretary of State for the US). They want peace and will do everything they can to keep it. If war is the only good solution then the US better do it right and with the help of the UN. I dont know how to fight this war, Im no general or politician or diplomat, but what I do know is that this job is NOT to be left to cowboy George W. Bush. He may be the end of the US's reputation if he gets his way. I want to love my country but Im afraid of what it might become.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mace_sundancer Newbie

mace_sundancer

Posted
Posted

what did i say? don't call bush and blair murderers. nor are they dictators. blair may be ignoring a vocal part of the country but he is doing the moral and ethical thing and trying to stop the real dictator. he is also trying to stop bush from going it alone, it's britain that's made sure the new draft second resolution which is beiing circulated has a 72 hour deadline for compliance and not a 48 hour one.

 

katarn07, don't take my word for it, look stuff up about the korea deal you can probably find out stuff if you do a google search, but that's my take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Divine Spirit Newbie

Divine Spirit

Posted
Posted

im quite scared that 2 people have chosen the first option - IMO it will only cause even more people to dislike amera and may result in "collateral damage" or the bombing of innocent civilians.

 

Giving weapons inspectors even more time is useless considering theyve been in there for some time, made a report and we all know how decieving Sadam is with these inspections

 

A treaty of peace wont be a good idea in case there is a point where i think attacking iraq is a good idea although im not sure of the terms in this treaty

 

Isnt assasination illegal or something? its a crazy thing to happen, how a country can legally bomb any targets (even civilian) they want and then its illegal to assasinate someone.im not sure of this but i think i saw it on TV so it HAS to be true! :D

 

No-one on Earth should just forget about this, sadam isnt going to stop.

 

i chose waiting for the UN because with this way most of the major countries will be in agreement and this option will mean it is less likely that other countries will get p!ssed off with america and britain. most people in britain are annoyed with tony blair as it is :eek: this will also mean that the attackers will have full support. i think its vital in this day and age that countries work together to sort things out and not go it alone.

 

the way backwards is empires dominating the globe, the way forward is intergalactic senates and senator amidala! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...