Iraq: yes or no??

[Captain Stubing]

Honest opinion + some reasoning. I'm in the military, fairly right-wing and presumably I should be supportive of an invasion/attack. However, even after a lot of thought on it I'm not sure.
What's your take?

Fezaesthesia - Prognosis poor...

[NewYorkDragons80]

YES!!!
I respect that you are in the military and worry about your own saftey, but this guy needs to go.

What people forget is that the only reason there was a cease-fire is because Iraq agreed to allow weapons inspectors in. Therefore, if they do not allow weapons inspectors, does that not send a message to the United States that Iraq is willing to fight again?

I'm not saying it's going to be a cake walk, but just remember the mass surrender during the Gulf War (And those Iraqi soldiers knew they would have to answer to Saddam, these soldiers know we are only there to get rid of him.)

During the uprising, rebels held every province in Iraq. That was without any American support (Unless you count Clooney, Wahlberg, Ice Cube, and Jonze.)

We should train Kurdish rebels in a friendly nation like Oman or Bahrain and then attack with a joint force of Americans and rebels.

If Iraqis are willing to accept the Kurds as their equals, great. If not, then maybe it's time for the independent "Kurdistan" they were promised after World War I.

Of course, because I'm saying this makes me a War Hawk right?

We live in the present, we dream of the future and we learn eternal truths from the past.
-Chiang Kai-Shek

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."
-Senator John McCain

This message was edited by NewYorkDragons80 on 3-25-02 @ 2:13 PM

[IRISjr]

Yes. Unless they help us with afgahnastan and pakistan and stuff.


If your not part of the solution. You are part of the problem.


<center><img src="http://members.aol.com/rundog2001/myhomepage/irisjr-new.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US"></center>

<font><FONT FACE=" comic sans ms">
<marquee>IRIS loves ya</marquee><font>
<font color "blue"><marquee>but IRIS jr probably doesn't</marquee></FONT>

<marquee>Monkeys in Suits Rule!!!
</marquee></FONT> </BODY>

[Drudge Jr.]

devil's advocate time,
iraq is clearly an enemy, but attacking them will do nothing but kill innocent victim's of hussien's despotism, similar to the innocents killed in afgahnistan. we may hate iraq over here, but over there we may not be as lucky as we were with afgahnistan.

I'm not the worst reporter ever!

[ag]

just remeber Iraq is our enemy, they hate our country and would do anything to bring it down!

<img src=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/ag1247/images/angry2.jpg>
In vino veritas

There's a place in the world for the angry young man With his working class ties and his radical plansHe refuses to bend, he refuses to crawl,He's always at home with his back to the wall.And he's proud of his scars and the battles he's lost,And he struggles and bleeds as he hangs on the cross-And he likes to be knowns as the angry young man.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Drudge Jr., you're right, but Saddam kills innocents senselessly in peacetime also. Look at what we're finding out now, he killed 100,000 Kurds in 1988. That was back when he was a "Friend" of the US because he was fighting the Ayatollah.

He will murder people either way, now it's just deciding whether or not we will cut off the artery.

We live in the present, we dream of the future and we learn eternal truths from the past.
-Chiang Kai-Shek

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."
-Senator John McCain

[furie]

I'm not sure if we should go in now, but let's face it, UN sanctions just aren't working.



<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/surfer.jpg" width=300 height=100 >
Thanks Fallon!

[TheGameHHH]

I say hell yes!!!

IT'S TIME TO PLAY THE GAME-AHHH!

<IMG SRC="http://wwfallon.50megs.com/RFnetTheGameHHH.jpg">
Thanks Fallon for the sig!

[mrbungle]

Pave it, then put an oil derrick over Saddam's palace.


O.G.***Original Gluesniffer...
It's not funny, my ass is on fire...

[NewYorkDragons80]

And don't expect UN sanctions to work. The only people they hurt are the common Iraqis who hate Saddam just as much as we do.

We live in the present, we dream of the future and we learn eternal truths from the past.
-Chiang Kai-Shek

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."
-Senator John McCain

This message was edited by NewYorkDragons80 on 3-26-02 @ 3:08 PM

[Doogie]

Is it me, or did economic sanctions really come to an effective end when we did it to the Japanese in November of 1941...when have economic sanctions ever been effective??

<IMG SRC=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/doogcool/myhomepage/rfnetdoogie76.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US>

"My father would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark and accuse cheasnuts of being lazy...I assure you there is nothing like a shrown scrotum"
Thank you WWF Fallon for the sig

[HordeKing1]

Carpet bomb those bastards until the sand turns to glass and we can see where best to put our new oil refineries.

The Iraquis etc are monstors.

http://members.aol.com/rnfpantera/hking2

[Yerdaddy]

I'll write out what I know about Iraq later, but right now I want to express my feelings about the comments on this thread.

Anyone who lumps together all Iraqis as if they were all Saddam Husseins and advocates wiping them all out, 1) does not know what the fuck they're talking about, and 2) has no respect for the values on which the United States was founded on - respect for the basic human rights of all human beings.

Nobody hates Saddam Hussein more than the Iraqi people. Saddam's Iraq invaded Kuwait to boost his power and influence in the Middle East and the United States intervened in order to stop his grab for power. Any moral posturing over the current situation is hypocritical unless it is by those few who spoke out against Saddam's use of chemical weapons against the Kurds in 1988, and the US continuing to support the regime afterward. Saddam is a filthy cocksucker who should be eaten alive by rats. But he is not the Iraqi people.

Americans can be justifiably outraged at the attack by al Quaeda against innocent US civilians, but to blame all the people of the Middle East is bigoted and ignorant, and is the antithesis of patriotism.


<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/sigelvis.jpg" >
BILLY STAPLES FAN SINCE DAY ONE

[NewYorkDragons80]

The Iraquis etc are monstors.
For a nation of 23,000,000+ that's a rather hefty generalization. Have you ever even met a common Iraqi that has suffered under Saddam? All the Iraqi people want is peace, democracy, and the opportunity to prosper. You think they give a fuck about Israel and Palestine? When a Conservative Christian is telling a Liberal Jew he is close-minded, it's a sad state of affairs.

We live in the present, we dream of the future and we learn eternal truths from the past.
-Chiang Kai-Shek

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."
-Senator John McCain

[cheezeemee]

Forget Iraq, Afghanistan and the rest of the middle east. China is the country to watch.

<HTML>
<img src="http://members.hometown.aol.com/boogertaste/images/4thebirdsig.jpg">
</HTML>
<br /><b><font color="yellow"></font></b>
<br />

[NewYorkDragons80]

CZM, you are right. I think everyone on this board has a right to know of China's link to terrorists, especially Al Qaeda. The following is from the Washington Post:

October 14, 2001

Beware China's ties to the Taliban

Jesse Helms

The deadly attacks on the United States in New York and Washington prompted some suggestions that the U.S. must work with Communist China to combat international
terrorism. This is a badly
misguided proposal that merits a hasty burial. Given the resolve the Bush
administration has displayed toward China to date, it is unlikely to fall into this trap. The very notion that the United States needs Chinese assistance is based on the flawed assumption that as a member of the U.N. Security Council, China's
acquiescence somehow becomes essential to the adoption of a resolution approving the use of force
against whomever the U.S.
deems responsible for the attacks in New York and Washington. To the
contrary, nothing could be
more disastrous. We have been down this U.N. road to disaster before. During Operation Desert Shield, the United States sought the approval of the Security Council to use force
against Saddam Hussein, but the resolution that was, in fact, adopted, approved the use of force only to expel Iraqi forces
from Kuwait, nothing more.
The very nature of that resolution tied the hands of U.S. forces and was one of the justifications used for stopping Operation Desert Storm with the Iraqi
Republican Guard intact and Saddam still in power.
That was a mistake that has been regretted to this day, and now that
the forces of international terrorism have struck New York and Washington, the U.S. cannot afford to waste time and energy consulting the United Nations. The second rationale for working with the Chinese is the weird assumption that China and the United States share a common interest in fighting terrorism. What a naive and dangerous fantasy.
The fact is, the Communist Chinese government is in bed with every one of the terrorist and terrorist-supporting rogue regimes (is it not now time that we dispose of the laughable "countries
of concern" nonsense?) of the Middle East. China's alliance with major rogue regimes has been so extensive and so well known for so long that it is absurd to pretend otherwise. Indeed, it is equally absurd to expect assistance against
terrorism from a regime that has supplied nuclear and missile technology to
Pakistan and Iran, chemical weapons materials to Iran, missile technology to Libya and air defense equipment to help Iraq shoot down U.S. pilots, all of which China has done. Less well known is that the Chinese government is one of the foremost benefactors of
Afghanistan's ruling Taliban, the focus of so much of U.S. attention since
Sept. 11. Moreover, China is the largest foreign investor in Afghanistan. On Sept. 11, Pakistan's Frontier Post reported that the Chinese and Afghani governments had signed a new economic and technical cooperation agreement. A defense cooperation agreement was signed in 1998 after Taliban officials allowed Chinese scientists to inspect unexploded cruise missiles that had been fired on Afghanistan in retaliation for Osama bin
Laden's attacks on U.S.
embassies in Africa. Those who imagine that the U.S. shares common interests with the Chinese in combating Islamic-based terrorism most likely base their assumption on China's fight against supposed Uighur terrorism in Xinjiang Province, formerly known as East Turkestan. But there is an ugly catch to that: If the U.S. should end up receiving any kind of support from Beijing for our anti-terrorist efforts, it will almost certainly come at the price of acquiescing in China's crackdown on the Uighurs (as well as its attempts to crush Tibet and
isolate Taiwan). That would be a moral calamity, for there is no justification in
lumping the Uighurs with the murderous fanatics who demonstrably mean us harm. The Uighurs are engaged in a just struggle for freedom from Beijing's tyrannical rule, for the most part peacefully. For this,

[cheezeemee]

China's ultimate goal is to destroy America's status as the sole superpower in the world.

This country is the only country in the world capable of launching a full scale invasion on the USA. Don't think they don't know it.

<HTML>
<img src="http://members.hometown.aol.com/boogertaste/images/4thebirdsig.jpg">
</HTML>
<br /><b><font color="yellow"></font></b>
<br />

[Yerdaddy]

This country is the only country in the world capable of launching a full scale invasion on the USA. Don't think they don't know it.

Zero chance. China's military is largely made up of piecemeal weapons systems from the Soviet Union. Maybe 100 years ago they could throw alot of bodies at us, but in today's modern warfare it would be like the woodchipper scene in Fargo.

<img src="http://yerdaddy.homestead.com/files/pics/sigelvis.jpg" >
BILLY STAPLES FAN SINCE DAY ONE

[NewYorkDragons80]

China doesn't have the balls to fight Taiwan, what makes you think they would want to invade the US?

The US has hands down the best Navy and Air Forcein the history of humanity. The first Chinese jet with limited stealth technology is due out in 2010. That's over 20 years behind us. (Never mind our secret stealth choppers and vessels, which will take them another 20 years to match.)

We live in the present, we dream of the future and we learn eternal truths from the past.
-Chiang Kai-Shek

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."
-Senator John McCain

[NewYorkDragons80]

Maybe 100 years ago they could throw alot of bodies at us, but in today's modern warfare it would be like the woodchipper scene in Fargo.
That's one of the best analogies I've ever heard on this board :)

We live in the present, we dream of the future and we learn eternal truths from the past.
-Chiang Kai-Shek

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."
-Senator John McCain

[sunndoggy8]

I'll write out what I know about Iraq later, but right now I want to express my feelings about the comments on this thread.

Anyone who lumps together all Iraqis as if they were all Saddam Husseins and advocates wiping them all out, 1) does not know what the fuck they're talking about, and 2) has no respect for the values on which the United States was founded on - respect for the basic human rights of all human beings.

Nobody hates Saddam Hussein more than the Iraqi people. Saddam's Iraq invaded Kuwait to boost his power and influence in the Middle East and the United States intervened in order to stop his grab for power. Any moral posturing over the current situation is hypocritical unless it is by those few who spoke out against Saddam's use of chemical weapons against the Kurds in 1988, and the US continuing to support the regime afterward. Saddam is a filthy cocksucker who should be eaten alive by rats. But he is not the Iraqi people.

Americans can be justifiably outraged at the attack by al Quaeda against innocent US civilians, but to blame all the people of the Middle East is bigoted and ignorant, and is the antithesis of patriotism.


I agree wholeheartedly with your post YerDaddy...that's why i requoted it.

Personally I think that the next actions of the US should be focused on either the conflict over Kashmir by India and Pakistan, or even more importantly, the Israeli-Palestinian mess...those are the areas that need the most attention....but they would be the hardest to help solve.

Iraq seems like the good PR thing to do, and an easy eventual win also. But the US has to deal with the other 2 situations, because I feel they're more prevalant.

<IMG SRC="http://home.att.net/~sunndoggy8/sunnysig1.jpg" width=300 height=80>

<font color="#0F00CD">"I love a good nap. Sometimes it's the only thing getting me out of bed in the morning."</font color="#0F00CD">

[A.J.]

Sunndoggy gets it. An overlooked situation is the India-Pakistan problem. You've got two nuclear states who have been "warring" for the last 50+ years. Add to the mix the fact that China has been providing missile technology and playing off the conflict to strengthen their own position.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Sunnydogg, you're right but it probably won't happen. We will never take sides in the India-Pakistan conflict. We have Pakistan who has been very helpful in the war, then we have India, the world's biggest democracy.

As far as Israel-Palestine, it's time we sent some peacekeepers there as well as Northern Ireland.

We live in the present, we dream of the future and we learn eternal truths from the past.
-Chiang Kai-Shek

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."
-Senator John McCain

[NewYorkDragons80]

One more thing about China; they are the worst mass murderers in the history of man. Over 175,000,000 deaths can be traced back to the communist government's actions or lack thereof.

We live in the present, we dream of the future and we learn eternal truths from the past.
-Chiang Kai-Shek

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."
-Senator John McCain