2004-11-15, 23:22 | Link #41 | |
*Kyuuketsuki Otaku*
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere in Hawaii
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2004-11-15, 23:56 | Link #42 | ||
セクシーなパイロット
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Kentucky
|
Quote:
Quote:
God that was lame... |
||
2004-11-15, 23:57 | Link #43 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Another guess I think is that the UN already thought about the resistance from the citizens and probably China, or Russia used their Veto to cancel an invasion. Another guess could be because if they did indeed attack Iraq, they'll have to rebuild the country and of course Iraq will have a bunch of small factions with Saddam out of the picture. |
|
2004-11-16, 01:02 | Link #44 |
Disabled By Request
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
|
(im not trying to offend anyone, these r simply my opinions)
-after reading over the conversation i thought id submit my thoughts a negative relationship no doubt about it has been formed with iraq, and on tv and or the internet, u can hear iraqis curse the states and ask wat theyve done to deserve this sort of punishment...wait, i thought the americans were supposed to help iraq? u no get rid of the leader, then everything would be great. his attack on terrorists in iraq focuses on his main goals mainly, he doesnt care for the peoples well being in iraq, otherwise he would probably stop killing them...probably. bush's logic is like killing a building full of civilians, just so he could kill a few terrorists, not caring about the other innocent people inside the building. a big part of the war was no doubt for oil, otherwise the americans wouldnt be pumping gas back to the US. maybe bush saw it as a win win situation. take some oil, free the country from a terrifying leader, then every 1 can congratulate u for taking bak sadaam and US will be known for not only being the stongest country military wise in the world, but for saving and helping 3rd world countries. although every 1 would like to, u cant just blame bush, hes the guy thats hired to make stupid disicions and take the blame for it, u can take this all the bak to the media, or the political infulence, w/e u think causes this actions, u can blame a lot of people and influences. many american troops die, and more iraqis troops die. for those who say it was a good decision to send troops into iraq, none of these disicions r good, but war exists becuz of bad desicions. Bush if just trying to make other countries fear the US that way his decisions can be backed up by other countries, reasuring his dicisions are correct to the people living in his country. |
2004-11-16, 01:18 | Link #46 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Since the main objective of the coalition going in was to drive invading Iraqi forces out of Kuwait and put a stop to Saddam's aggression towards neighboring countries...that much could be accomplished through heavy reliance on aircraft/smartbombs and using the stockpile of tomahawk cruise missles Ronald Reagan built-up during his presidency. Leaving Saddam in power, but with his military forces so trashed that the primary danger they posed was to the Iraqi people who were stuck dealing with the nut. Removal of Saddam was then left as an internal political problem for the Iraqi people to deal with. Unfortunately, as we saw no matter how tight the sanction screw was tightened nor how bad things became for the Iraqi people as a result, no popular uprising ever materialized in Iraq to remove Saddam. |
|
2004-11-16, 02:29 | Link #47 | |||
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2004-11-16, 04:35 | Link #48 |
666th Children
Join Date: Nov 2004
|
I didn't bother to read through that nice long sea of text, so forgive me if this was already mentioned.
Osama has been going against Islamic values from the moment he started his terror campaign. Values that advocate peace and brotherhood. Just ask any morderate Muslim. This 'approval' he has for mass murder seems based on an eye for an eye logic. This seems like a complete cop-out to me. |
2004-11-16, 05:00 | Link #49 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
2004-11-16, 06:58 | Link #50 | ||
Unfair
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
You just have to see how Bush didn't care that he wasn't approved for this war, he just wanted to get his oil and to attack the Iraq. Also, in case you didn't know, the USA are not in a that good position against the Iraq, even though their army is way stronger than the rebels. Also, the US army hasn't only killed rebels, but also might have killed innocents people. Quote:
__________________
|
||
2004-11-16, 07:09 | Link #51 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
At least it's not like there are masses of people taking to the streets in muslim countries to denounce Osama and go on to advocate peace and brotherhood with people in west. But you could probably get a mob together on short notice in most middle eastern cities with no problem if the purpose was to protest the west for [insert any reason here] and call for a jihad against the US. Complete with derogative but colorful chants by the crowd and flag/ foreign leader effigy burning. |
|
2004-11-16, 10:26 | Link #52 | |
Liberal Screamer
|
Quote:
|
|
2004-11-16, 16:26 | Link #54 |
Disabled By Request
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
|
i dont think iraq is in a position to be attacking the US. their having enough problems defending their own land. a lot of ppl in iraq r dead and injured, and most of the system that would have any influence on an attack to the US are in danger, or dead, and right now an attack on the states would only cause more termoil on their country from the states, and iraq would be accused mroe for having possesion on nuclear bombs and such.
if ur taken under by the terrorirst warnings on tv, and when the meter hits high u hide in ur bomb shelter, ur living under fear, and probably belive every word the media fishes out to u. if the country can be kept under fear theyll support the attack on terrorists becuz ur over concerned about having a terrorist attack on u. good thing the countries pinned down, and barely able to defend itself with its civilians dying. if theres ever a counter attack, itll be on every channel, so ull have fair warning to wait in ur bomb shelter with a shotgun |
2004-11-16, 16:33 | Link #55 | |
Liberal Screamer
|
Quote:
There was no evidence that Iraq was goin to attack the US. But there were tons on Osama Bin Laden. G Dubb just didn't care to read his debriefing. |
|
2004-11-16, 18:32 | Link #56 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
(I love Albinoblacksheep) But anyways. If you know anything about the US land, we CAN be self sufficent in oil if we start digging for our Shael rocks in the Midwest. Heck we have so much Oil in Alaska to last us another 100 years. Then of course all of our drilling in the Pacific. I'll just trust Bush on this one, where he claimed that Saddam had WMD. Oil is a part of it, but I'll just say "Manifest Destiny" So why not dig there? It's just not logical to build all those refineries, go through the WWF, and all that stuff. Yes I know he doesn't have any, and blah blah blah, but we didn't know that until we actually invaded AND checked ourselves. If someone kicks out our inspectors, doesn't like us all that much, we called them evil, what was the US to think? The US did kill innocent people. Heck there was a video recently where an Iraqi was playing dead to try and escape, then US soldiers were screaming "That fucker is Breathing!" "He's not Fucking Dead!!" *Rat-Tat-Tat. "He's dead now." |
|
2004-11-16, 19:19 | Link #57 | |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
As long as we are dependent on oil, we will always be dependent on foreign oil. There simply isn't enough in the US itself. Though we do have an abudance of coal, that would last 400 years if a cheap, efficient way to convert it into oil was developed. There are methods, but as far as I know they are too expensive and complex to do on a large scale. As for manifest destiny, in a thousand years history books will show a map of this era that will have the US spread across most of the planet, based on the location of our military bases. Isn't enough to kow that school children a thousand years from now will think we ruled most of the planet without actually doing so? Why go through the trouble of actually trying to rule it when we'll get the credit anyway? maybe...
__________________
Last edited by Kamui4356; 2004-11-16 at 19:32. |
|
2004-11-16, 19:33 | Link #58 | ||
*Kyuuketsuki Otaku*
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere in Hawaii
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
2004-11-16, 21:40 | Link #60 | |
Boobies˛ = Fun
|
Quote:
couldent resist |
|
|
|