Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,014

    Prez Bush.. Really looking out for us or just bored?

    I was really behind Bush when he was going to go after Saddam while we are not really sure if he has weapons of mass destruction.. I personally think that anyone that is a threat to safety of the american people should be ousted just as fast as the next guy but I mean Iraq has said "Ok come check it out" it seems like that is all Bush was looking for and now that they finally gave in still all this talk of war and getting approval? I mean hell give them this chance atleast I think they know what is going to happen if they do not follow through but I just dont see all this ongoing talk about war seems like it is getting closer and loser without even having gone over there.. Makes me wonder if Bush is really trying to help us or just finish up what his father didn't/get peoples minds of other things ie: Osama... I say give them the X amount of days the UN needs to get over there and get setup if they fall through then talk war, not the opposite..

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,815

    huh?

    Saddam said "Ok come check it out". Um, he had a decade to comply, he threw the inspectors out if you remember correctly.

    Only now when facing an asskicking does he pretend to be willing to comply. Give me a break, that's the kind of appeasing, lily-livered crap reasoning that makes the UN worthless.

    Nothing pisses me off worse than people that don't follow through with what they say. It's just like the parent that always says "if you do that one more time, I'll...." to his/her child and then never follows up, and then they wonder why they're unruly brats.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,014
    I do understand that but what I mean is Bush was basically saying either let weapons inspectors in or we are going to whip you ass.. Now Saddam has said OK come check it out(I realize how many times he has backed out of this before) but Bush is still going on.. Seems like the smart thing for him to do would be to wait quietly until they do not follow through with there promises then just go at them like a bat out of hell.. no more discussions..

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,815

    Ahh

    I see what you mean. I dunno, I think Bush really wants to oust Saddam regardless.

  5. #5

    Lightbulb How many chances?

    I don't want to sound overly aggressive but how many chances is enough before we finally decide to proceed against Saddam? Repeatedly we have asked for the UN to enforce itself and now, only when action is imminent does Saddam yield to the UN's demands. It takes time to build the support to get this far, should we let Saddam slow the machine down again? Sorry, this time I have to say no! We have given far to many opportunities for Saddam to demonstrate his good will, without the use of force. Without force being applied we have seen the true man, so what would lead you to believe that anything has changed?

    May the god of the Jew's, Christians, & Islam (whom my personal belief is one and the same, and yes I admit that I am not a scholar in this area) protect the people of the mid-east region from these few radical who seek to impose their minority beliefs on the majority.

    If only there was a perfect answer to lead to a perfect world

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Buckinghamshire, UK
    Posts
    342
    I think Saddam should be removed, in fact, he should have been removed from power the first time the Americans went in.

    I think now Bush has some other reason he wants to go after Iraq although I have no idea what other motive there is.

    As for Saddam kicking out the inspectors, they did spy on him which was beyond their mandate set by the UN. Their job was to make sure Saddam did not progress with a wapons programme, not to report back his locations. It amazes me that the US and UK got away with it, they were breaking rules too.
    hosting53.com - the hosting solutions company

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,688
    Sadam has disobeyed and rejected countless UN resolutions, he is making a complete mockery of the United Nations as an organization, making it look like a complete hypocrite that doesn't stand by its own words. I think people are forgetting what Sadam did back in 1991, he invaded another country. Look at the way he treats his own people.

    The main reason Saudi Arabia, Russia etc. are not 100% committed to this policy of innovation is because of what they could possibly loose in oil, the story about they care about their friends in Iraq is simply nonsense.

    Inaction is not an option, people would be saying the same thing about attacking Osama Bin Ladin before September 11th. Sadam has had his chance and he blew it many years ago, time is up, time to take action.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,372
    What about China....what makes them better than Iraq....surely they should be on the list...along with:

    Zimbabwe
    Syria
    Saudi Arabia (They behead people in public you know)
    Korea
    etc
    etc
    etc
    etc
    etc
    Despot country HERE
    Another Despot country HERE
    etc etc etc

    What makes Iraq any worse than any of the others?

    Simon

  9. #9

    Exclamation You have to start somewhere

    You have to start somewhere, and lucky Saddam has just gotten promoted to the head of the class. One benefit of actually taking action may be that some of these other countries may finally realize that we mean business and actually make an effort to improve some of these problems before the world decides to come help them improve them!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    3,734
    Originally posted by SimonMc

    What makes Iraq any worse than any of the others?

    Simon
    The possible development of weapons of mass destruction. Which would most asuredly be used against us.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,372
    Originally posted by lightnin


    The possible development of weapons of mass destruction. Which would most asuredly be used against us.
    Wheres the proof! Everybody is asking...and it is still not materialising. If the proof exists...SHOW it! If it does not exist...stop flexing your muscles.

    Simon

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    3,734
    Originally posted by SimonMc


    Wheres the proof! Everybody is asking...and it is still not materialising. If the proof exists...SHOW it! If it does not exist...stop flexing your muscles.

    Simon
    Don't ask me, I'm not a government representitive. I don't want to have a political arguement with you. You asked for a reason, I gave you one.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,372
    Originally posted by lightnin


    Don't ask me, I'm not a government representitive. I don't want to have a political arguement with you. You asked for a reason, I gave you one.
    Your reason was based on what?

    Personal opinion or insider knowledge that Sadam is going to kill us all. If you didn't want to get into a polital argument...you should have steared well clear of a political thread.

    Simon

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    3,734
    *sigh*

    The reasoning has been stated above quite clearly. There's no point in spelling it out for you yet again. Saddam has been playing games with the UN weapons inspectors for years now. Enough is enough. Proof? The proof is in Saddams actions in the past. Period. End of story.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,517
    I would like to see proof before bush sends his troops. I am totally for demolishing terrorist organizations, but lets at LEAST have solid proof before we do so. Our country should not be looked upon as "bullies", just because we are the super power of the world. Bush has it out for iraq, he said in plain english "Unless they allow UN inspectors back in, we will strike", Iraq gave the okay, give it a chance. Send inspectors back in, if he fouls up once, attack. My theory is that Bush JR, is getting his advice from his father Bush SR, who has been speaking out about iraq, even after his presidency.

    My .02

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    3,734
    God I hope he's not taking advice from his father! His father is one of the reasons we are still dealing with this problem. A good bit of this, IMHO is Dubya's desire to clean up the mess that daddy left behind in Iraq.

    I don't know if I agree or disagree as to whether or not we should go into Iraq. I don't know if it's the right time or not. I understand the desire for proof and I wouldn't mind seeing some myself, but I also understand the desire to act based on whatever intelligence they have regarding the situation.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,372
    Originally posted by lightnin
    *sigh*

    The reasoning has been stated above quite clearly. There's no point in spelling it out for you yet again. Saddam has been playing games with the UN weapons inspectors for years now. Enough is enough. Proof? The proof is in Saddams actions in the past. Period. End of story.
    Oh..OK..lets go nuke him then.

    If it has been going on for years...whats the big rush to get in and at him. If it was because you have to draw a line somewhere...where is the line. All this talk and no proof...yeah. yeah.. yeah..he has been messing with the UN...but then again..he is a despot tyrant who does not play by the rules. But what about the US...???? If they go in unsupported...what does that make them. World policemen or conquerers.

    Simon

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    3,734
    I take it then that if we do go into Iraq, we can look forward to some angry looking logos coming from you?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,372
    Originally posted by lightnin
    I take it then that if we do go into Iraq, we can look forward to some angry looking logos coming from you?
    I am not angry and I don't disagree either with giving Saddam what for. I just want to see the proof first. There is a fine line between right and wrong...just and unjust. If it was up to me...I would have kicked his butt. But then again...I am not running the most powerful country in the world. I am just scraping a living making logos...as you rightly pointed out.

    Simon

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,014
    I think the UN was put there for a reason.. EVERY country has to follow there rules.. I think all the proof that is needed is that we keep getting denied access to what was set by the UN back in 91' so there is OBVIOUSLY something they are hiding.. What I was saying by this thread is we should give them 2 weeks or whatever time frame the UN says it is going to take to get ready and fly over there.. if he does not comply.. blow him to hell.. this may or may not be Bush Sr left overs but the way I look at it is all comes down to myself and my familys safety along with protecting the freedom I have living in America.. regardless I doubt Saddam is going to go through with his promises it just seems like if BUsh is trying to get everyones approval for this he would give them until the UN is ready and then say "HA told you so!" and I am sure he would get alot more approval rather than not waiting at all and annoucing plans of war on a daily basis..

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,571
    In my opinion President Bush should quit trying to boost his self-esteem. If the US really wanted Saddam out, they could have done it in the Gulf War. Remember, we used to be buddies in the 80s.
    -Mooneer
    Thoughtbug Software: Hosting shouldn't require any thought.
    Legitimate host? Support the Code of Ethical Conduct

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Kelowna B.C.
    Posts
    1,686
    I think Saddam is just stalling, and complying so the US can't go to war without being ridiculed by their allies for not going through the UN. You bet Saddam has those weapons. And he was just given 2 weeks until the weapons inspectors come trotting in only to find out that Saddam was once again lying!
    One funny part about this is Saddam has many (20 or so) "Presidencial Palaces" within Iraq, and apparently these buildings are strictly off limits to the inspectors.

    Are you thinking what i'm thinking??

    You ask how a country can keep things under wraps without anyone knowing they were developing weapons of mass destruction. Look at the US! They got military secrets galore! You think Saddam is going to disclose to his people that he is now officially nuclear, or that he has biological agents? The man is mad, he's rich, filthy rich! And he's a loonatic, when you put those together you get one deadly combination.

    And now Bush - he's not winning any popularity contests, neither is his pal Tony Blair. This texan homeboy is looking to grab himself a coon and in the process systematically take over Iraq and make a cloned capitalist economy so that he can benefit. Now he doesn't care if he wakes up the neighbours, in fact he'll single handedly take them on as all his friends have left - calling him nutz! Bush don't have time to go to the town meeting, he wants action now and if he has the opportunity he'll bend the rules in his favor. Bush needs to get off his high horse as the savior of the world, and go put on some pants that fit him. Right now they're so big he can't even see the light of day!

    Anyway thats my 2 cent story.
    Hosting.Express | Affordable Web and Email Hosting
    Shared | Reseller | 24/7 Support | NSA Free
    SPECIAL OFFER - domain name, email and cPanel web hosting = $3.73 per month | Contact Us: 1-800-861-1888

  23. #23
    i think the comparison between Hitler and Bush was very appropriate... what Hitler did to the Jews, Bush is doing to Muslims.

    Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq... then where?

    (I feel a bashing coming on ... its ok, as long as it's a proper political debate, not just media nonsense)

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    4
    I haven't read this thread past the few few posts so I don't know if it was mentioned, but actually, he DIDN'T throw the inspectors out - they left of their own free will. Dig back a few years in the news vaults and you'll find this out.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    The Woodlands, Tx
    Posts
    5,974
    Originally posted by SimonMc


    Wheres the proof! Everybody is asking...and it is still not materialising. If the proof exists...SHOW it! If it does not exist...stop flexing your muscles.

    Simon
    When a nuke drops on your head, will that be proof enough?

    As for us nuking him, we arent interested in taking out the country, only it's leader and his following. If we were to nuke it, we wouldnt be able to access the oil for about a thousand years..

    I doubt it will be much of a war anyway. Just remember the first time around....armed Iraqi solders were surrendering to unarmed news reporters

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •