Saddam Lovers [Archive] - RonFez.net Messageboard

Death Metal Moe

03-20-2003, 08:59 PM

I've done it and it's just a cheap way to get a ZING in at someone. I admit it.

Look at it like this. If you're against the war, you were happy with the Inspections. The inspections, by all accounts were not working. Saddam gave little bits here and there. Wo PRO-inspection was PRO-give saddam all the time he felt like to disarm.

So if you're for that, you must really think Saddam is just a misunderstood guy and you are part of the Saddam Fan Club.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

fluffernutter

03-20-2003, 09:01 PM

He's got a moustache
Can't go wrong with a moustache

Thanks! It is growing in nicely!

Kyle From Incantation Has A Moustache

http://www.metalcorefanzine.com/8502_6.jpg

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=fnutter">

2/5 OF THE MOUSTACHE LEAUGE

170 LBS is 90 KG, METRICS can even make you THIN

TooCute

03-20-2003, 09:03 PM

Look at it like this. If you're against the war, you were happy with the Inspections. The inspections, by all accounts were not working. Saddam gave little bits here and there. Wo PRO-inspection was PRO-give saddam all the time he felt like to disarm.

So if you're for that, you must really think Saddam is just a misunderstood guy and you are part of the Saddam Fan Club.

Is it possible that people could be all for getting rid of Saddam, but uneasy about doing it without the support of the rest of the world?

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/toocute2.gif>
!! 2% !!

Death Metal Moe

03-20-2003, 09:08 PM

Is it possible that people could be all for getting rid of Saddam, but uneasy about doing it without the support of the rest of the world?

And how long should we have waited for the rest of the world, represented buy the UN that ALL voted for resolution 1441 which threatened severe consequences for non compliance to the disarmament?

12 years seems long enough for me.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

The Blowhard

03-20-2003, 09:09 PM

Is it possible that people could be all for getting rid of Saddam, but uneasy about doing it without the support of the rest of the world?

The French and the Russians have major investments and dealings with Saddam. They have also been accused(the French) of selling him weapons and materials to build nukes.
Back in the 80's France built Iraq nuclear reactors. Thank God the Israelis bombed them.
The truth is, we are doing the worlds "dirty work". Once the campaign in Iraq is over, watch the French and the other UN weasels jump on the bandwagon.

TooCute

03-20-2003, 09:12 PM

12 years seems long enough for me

The key words being "for me". Perhaps other people were willing to give him longer. Doesn't make them right, doesn't make you right - just a difference of opinion. Certainly doens't make someone a "Saddam lover" - perhaps many of the war protesters simply weren't ready to admit that diplomacy and peace had failed completely.

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/toocute2.gif>
!! 2% !!

Death Metal Moe

03-20-2003, 09:18 PM

The key words being "for me". Perhaps other people were willing to give him longer. Doesn't make them right, doesn't make you right - just a difference of opinion

Seriously Too Cute. He was supposed to willingly disarm. Inspectors WERE NEVER meant to have to drag it out of him. How long would YOU give someone who was supposed to do all the work for you as a result of the cease fire agreement your own government signed?

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

TooCute

03-20-2003, 09:27 PM

Seriously Too Cute. He was supposed to willingly disarm. Inspectors WERE NEVER meant to have to drag it out of him. How long would YOU give someone who was supposed to do all the work for you as a result of the cease fire agreement your own government signed?

I'm not sure. In this case I'm inclined to say that I would probably have given him longer, in the intrest of avoiding war.

So what if the inspectors had to drag it out of him? At least they were making some progress - I'm only sorry that our President was too impatient.

War should always be a last resort, and in this instance I hardly think that we were at a 'last resort' stage. Nobody was in immediate danger.

With that said, will I be happy if I hear that they 'got' (as the media have been putting it all day) Saddam? You bet I will.

So, am I a Saddam lover? Amd I anti-american?

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/toocute2.gif>
!! 2% !!

Death Metal Moe

03-20-2003, 09:28 PM

Thanks! It is growing in nicely!

Kyle From Incantation Has A Moustache

And don't think that Anal Cunt refrence went unnoticed Fluff!

Best part of that song is when the music stops and Kyle is on the phone and just says "This is Kyle from Incantation, and I HAVE a mustache."

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

fluffernutter

03-20-2003, 09:33 PM

I have just gotten to the point where I am really obsessed with the moustache.

I understand that we are a country at war here and these are serious times. I just like to insert the little smile here and there where I feel it may be appropriate.

Anal Cunt references should NEVER be unnoticed!

As far as Saddam goes, I think that there has been too many times where he blew his shot to come clean and be a good Dictator if there is such a thing. Although I am not behind Governor Bush and HIS possible motives behind the Liberation of the Iraqi people (which is MOST important here) in a time of war you gotta support his decision. Just what I have read in my research on Bush just makes me feel uncomfortable as to what his ultimate big picture may be.

As much as this may sound fucked up, I want to see Saddam LIVE and therefore be made to suffer and feel the wrath of the pain that he has caused on so many people for too long. It is not my place to say who lives and who dies. Receive pain and suffering yes, not mortality. It is almost unfair for all of the SHIT he has brought upon the INNOCENT for him to just die. Just like I feel it was so unfair for Hitler (and I am NOT comparing) to kill himself after the suffering he inflicted upon all the Jews. Although, I believe he will have a higher power to answer to in his final judgement, while his pimply ass is still here on earth, I say torture the fucker and make him wish he had never inflicted pain upon ANYONE! Sit him in the seat like the lady who was going nuts in AIRPLANE! and have the long line of those waiting just to smack his fat face.

I am gonna have some nice Keilbasa right now, thank you.

I hope and pray MOST OF ALL for our troops and loved ones who are overseas in this time.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=fnutter">

2/5 OF THE MOUSTACHE LEAUGE

170 LBS is 90 KG, METRICS can even make you THIN

Death Metal Moe

03-20-2003, 09:38 PM

So what if the inspectors had to drag it out of him? At least they were making some progress - I'm only sorry that our President was too impatient.

I think that you didn't see it like I and many other did. The inspectors weren't FINDING things, they were ALLOWED to find things. They only saw what Saddam WANTED them to see. So he'd let them find a little more everytime it looked like we were getting serious about fighting him. That would make the whole UN discuss this until the end of time. But Bush, Blair and the many other saw this stalling for what it was, and took action.

As for an impatient president, is 12 years impatient? Is this REALLY a rush to war? If Bush REALLY wanted to rush to war, why did we sit in the UN for months? If Colon Powell made ONE MORE SPEECH at that UN council of weasles I was gonna puke like a San Fransisco protestor.

And you are not inherently Un-American in my view. You are mistaken. It is your right as a citizen to take whatever side of an agrument you like.

But backing the anti-war movement which is infact Anti-Amerianism in disguise 9 times out of 10 may.Be careful who you back and who you associate with.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

PanterA

03-20-2003, 09:40 PM

Can't go wrong with a moustacheTell that to ol' Rollie Fingers.
http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/hofer_bios/images/fingers_rollie.jpg

<center><img style="backround:COLOR" style="color:RED" style="border style:double 6px" src="http://members.aol.com/fezwhatleyfan/rfsig"></center>

PanterA

03-20-2003, 09:42 PM

I'm not sure. In this case I'm inclined to say that I would probably have given him longer, in the intrest of avoiding war.He had 12 years to disarm.

He also said he got rid of all his scud missles, yet he is targeting our troops with scuds.

Fuck him, he's most likely dead now anyway.

<center><img style="backround:COLOR" style="color:RED" style="border style:double 6px" src="http://members.aol.com/fezwhatleyfan/rfsig"></center>

schmega

03-20-2003, 09:44 PM

Nobody was in immediate danger.

and there's the difference between your views and the ones of the President, and all the smart people he has around him. saddam is a potential threat. a threat with lots of potential. maybe not today, but if he had a lot of tomorrows, yes. ya gotta nip this in the bud.

TheMojoPin

03-20-2003, 09:48 PM

It's a cheap shot.

Either you're for the war...or doing nothing at all.

Either you support the president 24seven...or you're anti-American.

You're either with us or against us.

As much as people don't want it to be, these are complicated issues. They want it to be simple, but it's not.

I think Saddam's a chode. I want him out. I just didn't agree how the only two options seemingly presented were sending just a few dozen inspectors who couldn't possibly find everything (Even though almost every "in the field" news report I hear mentions how the weapons and tech that WERE destroyed by the inspectors in the last 12 years ARE helping and taking a LOT off the minds of our troops. They didn't do NOTHING, goddammit) or a fullscale invasion on the part of the Americans. I wanted it to seem like more options were being explored, and they weren't...or at least as far as I could tell. It was basically all or nothing, and no shot at even trying for an in-between.

The thing that still hasn't been presented to ANYONE is why NOW? Why so soon? What's the rush? Yes, Saddam has not complied with the treaties signed over the years...but how is that any different then, 1 year ago? 2? 3? 5? 7? Yes, it IS ridiculous, and he needs to go, but what's the friggin' rush? There's no indication that's he any more of an immediate threat than he's been in the last 12 years...why couldn't we push for a less drastic measure? I mean, is it really that likely that it would have taken more than a few months or a year tops to get the "full" support needed?

That's always been and always will be my biggest question, and my main issue of protest...why now? If they go in there and pull out the proof that for whatever reason couldn't be shared until now, hey, way to go, I was dead wrong. I'll fully admit it. But until then, I have my doubts...I think we're ultimately doing the right thing, but going about it the wrong way and rushing things too fast. But that's just me.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

TooCute

03-20-2003, 09:52 PM

saddam is a potential threat. a threat with lots of potential. maybe not today, but if he had a lot of tomorrows, yes.

So we all agree, there was no immediate threat.

Pro-war and anti-war people disagree on how to handle that potential future threat.

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/toocute2.gif>
!! 2% !!

PanterA

03-20-2003, 09:53 PM

it's like finding a tumor, and going...oh it's not a threat yet...lets wait till it developes into cancer, then we'll take it out.

<center><img style="backround:COLOR" style="color:RED" style="border style:double 6px" src="http://members.aol.com/fezwhatleyfan/rfsig"></center>

TheMojoPin

03-20-2003, 09:57 PM

it's like finding a tumor, and going...oh it's not a threat yet...lets wait till it developes into cancer, then we'll take it out.

Or it's like, "hey, we found this tumor...but instead of seeing whether we can take it out with chemo, or if it's even cancerous or even requires treatment or surgery, we'll just crack you open right here and feel around until we find what we think we're looking for. Pardon the mess."

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Death Metal Moe

03-20-2003, 10:00 PM

The thing that still hasn't been presented to ANYONE is why NOW? Why so soon? What's the rush? Yes, Saddam has not complied with the treaties signed over the years...but how is that any different then, 1 year ago? 2? 3? 5? 7?

I think the difference was 9/11 and the reality what terrorist states can do with shit like that.

Yes, they didn't use chemical weapons in 9/11, but it finally showed us that these fuckers could get us, and the chemical/biological/nuclear materials in Iraq could and may have already have been given out to terrorists and get us.

I think no one wanted to believe we could ever be hit here. Now we exist in a different world and different times. Times where Bush saw a threat NOW, and acted agaist it not caring in the end whether the UN would sit on it's hands again or not.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

schmega

03-20-2003, 10:08 PM

there was no immediate threat.

you know what an immediate threat is? an icbm coming back into orbit aimed for the heart of our city. i'm not gonna wait til it comes to that.

TheMojoPin

03-20-2003, 10:09 PM

But it's still a case of "woulda", "coulda" and "shoulda". Look, ultimately, I'm glad this is going down, and thus far, it seems to be being handled very well by our government. I have faith in them and our troops. But there is ZERO evidence that Iraq had been selling the stuff, or was even going to. Like I said, find the proof, make me wrong, all is well. But in the meantime, there is no reason we couldn't have waited up to a year to get this done without things being so ugly around the world. But ultimately, yes, waiting more than a year, in my opinion, would have been a mistake.

You have to realize, this is why a LOT of countries find this shit scary. Maybe the US won't pull it, but what if another "big" country like Russia or China pounces on a smaller country because they "might" be a threat to them? It's a precedent that scares a lot of people, and we luckily don't have to feel that because we ARE so powerful. It's not an excuse...just kind of a guess as to why people may be so bugged out. Not everyone it as anti-American as you think...it's just freaky being one of the "little guys" in a world this gonzo.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

schmega

03-20-2003, 10:18 PM

It's a precedent that scares a lot of people

thats true. it COULD set a bad precedent. but no other country is as big or as prominent a target, and nobody else's skyscraper's been toppled. and it just so happens saddam's a REALLY AWFUL PERSON. all the conditions are right for us to attack. some other country's gonna have to build up a helluva strong case if they wanna do the same.

TheMojoPin

03-20-2003, 10:26 PM

But don't you get it? To the rest of the world, we haven't proven that Saddam had ANYTHING to do with 9/11. The only POSSIBLE connection brought up at this point is that he COULD help supply a similar event to 9/11 in the future...which is a damn good reason for us taking him out, in my opinion, but for people and countries around the world, it looks like we're forcing a round block into a square peg with a hammer, and saying that it "fits". We're almost presenting rhetoric as "fact"...and it's confusing to plenty of people. People seem to think that saying "Saddam" and "9/11" in the same sentence somehow link the two forever. The issues ARE related, but hardly as directly and as immediately as implied.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

Death Metal Moe

03-20-2003, 10:27 PM

Other countries are attacking ALL THE TIME it seems and the UN sits by. So they're just doing what they always do. Watching history unfold and doing nothing. In this case at least, there is a responsible country fighting a justified war for the right reasons and with a positive outcome.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

ChickenHawk

03-20-2003, 10:53 PM

Moe's pretty much got this topic taken care of... There's not much else to say.

And just because the United Nazis don't give us support, doesn't mean shit. France and Russia have an obvious oil agenda, so of course they don't want to attack Iraq. When did the useless UN ever become so important? Where was UN approval in '95 and '98 when Clinton was president? The silence was DEAFENING when Billy Boy was bombing the shit out of the Serbs and destroying every bridge along the Danube River. Where was the concern for UN approval when we went into Somalia and killed civilians and ourselves? I know some of you are gonna say "I was out there, speaking out against it when that happened", and maybe you were, but the truth is, the backlash against American policy was not 1/100th of what it is right now. It sickens me how much the resistence of "peace" protestors is truly anti-Bush and not anti-war. A bomb with a "D" on it is acceptable, but a bomb with an "R" on it is EVIL.

<IMG SRC="http://homepage.mac.com/fathernoel/.Pictures/parodysig.gif">
SIG CURRENTLY STUNTING * NEW SIG COMING THIS SPRING

Death Metal Moe

03-20-2003, 11:03 PM

El Presidente Chicken Hawk!!

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

Steels

03-20-2003, 11:05 PM

So, am I a Saddam lover? Am I anti-american?

No, just blind.

<img src=http://members.aol.com/vikorynotvengnce/images/steels3.gif>

TheMojoPin

03-20-2003, 11:14 PM

Where was UN approval in '95 and '98 when Clinton was president? The silence was DEAFENING when Billy Boy was bombing the shit out of the Serbs and destroying every bridge along the Danube River. Where was the concern for UN approval when we went into Somalia and killed civilians and ourselves? I know some of you are gonna say "I was out there, speaking out against it when that happened", and maybe you were, but the truth is, the backlash against American policy was not 1/100th of what it is right now.

You're right. 100% right. But it's just as pathetic to argue about this as the "lefties" who constantly dwell on bullshit "no war for oil arguments" or try and say this is "Bush trying to fight his daddy's war!" It's an easy way to avoid the issues in the hear and now.

Look, I'll say it again, you're right. Hindsight is always brutally honest. I remember being so fucking mad that the rallies I went to against the Clinton-Iraq bombings never attracted more than 600 people at the most. It's hypocritical and just ignorant. But in the here and now, people are making up their minds for various reasons (Just not liking Bush obviously being one of them), and they're going with what they think they know. Ugly things are said and done and mistakes and false assumptions are being made left and right by BOTH sides, so it's best to try and wade through the morons. If they succeed in distracting you, their stupidity has won.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 3-21-03 @ 3:19 AM

GaryWyze

03-21-2003, 01:07 AM

In the interest of brevity, I'm going to use this one post to answer things you've said in several postings.

Is it possible that people could be all for getting rid of Saddam, but uneasy about doing it without the support of the rest of the world?

Sure, but it doesn't say much about the courage of their convictions. What's right is right, with or without World support.

perhaps many of the war protesters simply weren't ready to admit that diplomacy and peace had failed completely.

C'mon, let's get real... people who stand in the rain and risk arrest aren't doing so because they feel that the invasion was a tad bit premature. They're opposed to war, period. Which is fine, even somewhat admirable, but let's stop pretending that this has anything to do with more time, exclamation point!

In this case I'm inclined to say that I would probably have given him longer, in the intrest of avoiding war.

Giving him more time wasn't going to avoid a war. The only thing more time would've accomplished is to have allowed him to inch even closer to having more and greater biological weapons... perhaps even nuclear.

As it is, we allowed him to go unchecked for far too long.

So what if the inspectors had to drag it out of him? At least they were making some progress

They were? How so?

In order for any progress to have been made, Saddam had to be willing to disarm. If he sincerely was, he wouldn't have armed Iraq in the first place. You don't spend tens of millions of dollars, and risk your regime's - as well as your own - very existence in building weapons of mass destruction, only to destroy them later.

Have you not caught any of the inspector's reports, thus far? Saddam has refused to supply them with a single shred of evidence that he has destroyed any of his arsenal. Their inspections were met with resistance at every opportunity.

Iraq is the size of California. How in the World can you seriously suggest that a team, perhaps a dozen or so men, would eventually find that which Saddam must hide at any cost?

War should always be a last resort, and in this instance I hardly think that we were at a 'last resort' stage. Nobody was in immediate danger.

The whole point to this operation is to ensure that it never comes to that. Never comes to a point where the danger is immediate.

I'm going to assume that you'll concede the fact that the only thing stopping Saddam from using something like an atomic weapon is the fact that he doesn't yet have one.

Because if you believe otherwise, despite the long list of crimes on humanity this man has already committed, than I just wasted 15 minutes that could've been better spent watching Charles In Charge.

And finally, yes... you can be against the war and still not anti-american. All it takes is a whole lot of na‹vet‚.

<center>http://czm.racknine.net/images/krustysig.jpg

Much thanks to CZM for the killer sig</center>

This message was edited by GaryWyze on 3-21-03 @ 5:18 AM

FollowThisLogic

03-21-2003, 04:47 AM

So we all agree, there was no immediate threat.
Sure, I can agree to that.

Much of the world also agreed during the 1930s that a country that was obliterated in WWI, and happened to be under some new leadership, probably couldn't be a threat either.

Then a few countries adjacent to this country were taken over by it, because this new leadership was given years to build weapons and a huge military force.

You've heard of that country, right? And that guy who was leading it? I mean, it's just a small sidenote in the history books, but I'm sure someone's heard of him. What was his name again? Hitler?

Personally, I find it quite amusing how France doesn't learn from their own fucking mistakes.

And Saddam - damn, if you didn't think he was full of shit before about disarming, how could you POSSIBLY still think he wasn't jerking us around?

HE IS USING SCUDS.

HE WAS SUPPOSED TO GET RID OF ALL HIS SCUDS 12 YEARS AGO.

THEY THOUGHT HE DID. OOPS.

The disarming was a load of shit, and any anti-war argument is just as solid.

Were we just supposed to wait until Saddam got a bug up his ass one day and decided that his forces were big enough that he was just gonna take over half the Middle East? Were we not supposed to consider him a threat until it was too late?

Tell me, anti-war people..... where's the fucking line?

(Edit: Oops, sorry for screwing up the thread, heh.)

<center><img src="http://followthislogic.50megs.com/rf-screw.jpg" alt="Just say 'Screw all ya'll.' Trust me. It'll work."> <marquee direction=up scrollamount=1 height=14><center>all that i have all that i hold all that.. is wrong all that i feel for or trust in or love all that.. is gone </center> </marquee></center>

This message was edited by FollowThisLogic on 3-21-03 @ 10:26 AM

HBox

03-21-2003, 06:49 AM

Tell me, anti-war people..... where's the fucking line?

I'll tell you where the the line is. Weapons of mass desturction. Chemical Weapons. Biological Weapons. Nuclear Weapons. I could give a crap if he has Scud missiles. They are no threat to our national security. They can't be handed to terrorists, they're too big. If Scud missiles are the only thing Iraq has, I don't think this war is worth it. What happened to all the talk of WMDs and handing them to terrorists? I thought that was the number one reason for this war.

toneburst20

03-21-2003, 07:03 AM

he "may do this" or he "will do that" in the future is bullshit... what happened to innocent till proven guilty, the stuff this country was "founded" on. out the window huh?.. From what i've read of some posts on this board some of you guys like to joke about having fun with a lady while she's drunk... is that enough proof that you may rape someone... should we lock you up now before you do.... this is real life no Minortiy Report

Also if your for the war thats fine... probably would have come to this at some point anyway... but please please dont tell me it's because of the treatment he gives his people... thats bullshit... the U.S. doesn't care about that.... if we did why hasn't ANY president since i've been alive mentioned a situation like Tibet.

The light at the end of a tunnel...... is a train

TheMojoPin

03-21-2003, 07:33 AM

Much of the world also agreed during the 1930s that a country that was obliterated in WWI, and happened to be under some new leadership, probably couldn't be a threat either.

What? They were trying to vainly put in check and already out-of-control Hitler. Who the hell was thinking he "wasn't a threat?" They were trying to foolishly appease him BECAUSE they thought he was a threat.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

FollowThisLogic

03-21-2003, 07:51 AM

I could give a crap if he has Scud missiles. They are no threat to our national security. They can't be handed to terrorists, they're too big. If Scud missiles are the only thing Iraq has, I don't think this war is worth it.
You missed the point. The point is, we thought all the Scuds were gone. If he was hiding those, what else is he hiding?

Maybe those WMDs you're afraid of.

We wouldn't find out until it was too late, until the weapons were used.

"Innocent until proven guilty" - again, you want to wait until after a major disaster has happened before doing anything about it?

Let's say a guy is standing in front of you, with a loaded gun pointed at your head, screaming that he's going to shoot you. A witness is watching the whole thing and has ample opportunity to call the police. Would you rather wait till he fires the gun before anything is done about it? After all, it's not necessarily a crime to stand there and scream that he's going to kill you.

<center><img src="http://followthislogic.50megs.com/rf-screw.jpg" alt="Just say 'Screw all ya'll.' Trust me. It'll work."> <marquee direction=up scrollamount=1 height=14><center>all that i have all that i hold all that.. is wrong all that i feel for or trust in or love all that.. is gone </center> </marquee></center>

This message was edited by FollowThisLogic on 3-21-03 @ 12:00 PM

TooCute

03-21-2003, 08:06 AM

Let's say a guy is standing in front of you, with a loaded gun pointed at your head, screaming that he's going to shoot you. A witness is watching the whole thing and has ample opportunity to call the police. Would you rather wait till he fires the gun before anything is done about it? After all, it's not necessarily a crime to stand there and scream that he's going to kill you.

What if he's been doing it for 12 years?
Why NOW?

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/toocute2.gif>
!! 2% !!

FollowThisLogic

03-21-2003, 08:07 AM

Why later?

<center><img src="http://followthislogic.50megs.com/rf-screw.jpg" alt="Just say 'Screw all ya'll.' Trust me. It'll work."> <marquee direction=up scrollamount=1 height=14><center>all that i have all that i hold all that.. is wrong all that i feel for or trust in or love all that.. is gone </center> </marquee></center>

FollowThisLogic

03-21-2003, 08:10 AM

Another answer to "why now?" is our post-9/11 anti-terrorism kick. If Saddam did have/could make/is hiding WMD, he could sell that stuff to terrorists.

Don't get me wrong, I think terrorism can't be stopped, and to think it can be stopped is really arrogant. If they don't get it from Saddam, they can get it elsewhere, Saddam just happens to hate us the most. But, just saying, that's a reason.

<center><img src="http://followthislogic.50megs.com/rf-screw.jpg" alt="Just say 'Screw all ya'll.' Trust me. It'll work."> <marquee direction=up scrollamount=1 height=14><center>all that i have all that i hold all that.. is wrong all that i feel for or trust in or love all that.. is gone </center> </marquee></center>

TooCute

03-21-2003, 08:12 AM

Why later?

Because between now, and later, there's the possibility that something could be done to avoid war.

<img src=http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/toocute2.gif>
!! 2% !!

FollowThisLogic

03-21-2003, 08:14 AM

Because between now, and later, there's the possibility that something could be done to avoid war.
Such as?

And don't say inspections. They're a well-proven failure. And check out the post I got in before yours.

<center><img src="http://followthislogic.50megs.com/rf-screw.jpg" alt="Just say 'Screw all ya'll.' Trust me. It'll work."> <marquee direction=up scrollamount=1 height=14><center>all that i have all that i hold all that.. is wrong all that i feel for or trust in or love all that.. is gone </center> </marquee></center>

This message was edited by FollowThisLogic on 3-21-03 @ 12:15 PM

TheMojoPin

03-21-2003, 08:52 AM

Why later?

Why war?

Again, all I ask is why the two options that were only considered were either send in a couple of inspectors or enagage in a fullscale US invasion. What, there isn't ANY kind of a middle ground?!?

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

FollowThisLogic

03-21-2003, 08:55 AM

Your middle ground must:

1) Be acceptable to anti-war people.
2) Successfully removes any threat from Iraq and/or Saddam Hussein.
3) See through all of Saddam's deceptions to achieve this success.

If you have any suggestions on how to do this, and make it work, I'd love to hear them. But I'm not guessing that anyone does have these suggestions. Simply saying, "well, that's not for me to figure out, that's the government's job" is not enough - remember, the government's best solution is exactly what they're doing now. You're protesting that solution. That leaves it on your shoulders to come up with a better one.

I would venture to say that if such a solution existed - and would actually work - it probably would have been tried.

<center><img src="http://followthislogic.50megs.com/rf-screw.jpg" alt="Just say 'Screw all ya'll.' Trust me. It'll work."> <marquee direction=up scrollamount=1 height=14><center>all that i have all that i hold all that.. is wrong all that i feel for or trust in or love all that.. is gone </center> </marquee></center>

TheMojoPin

03-21-2003, 09:07 AM

1) Be acceptable to anti-war people.

No it doesn't The current actions proves that they really don't give two flying fucks about what the anti-war people think. Why start any time soon?

And maybe you're right. But I doubt it. I have a feeling that people wanted what seemed like the quickest solution, which isn't always the best solution. It's right to ask "why later?", but at the same time you have to wonder, "why the rush?" when the main argument of "Iraq directly threatens America" has yet to be proven. Wait it out and see what can be done...he's done nothing in 12 years. Despite all this crowing about his "weapons development", at BEST it would be a fraction of what it was in the 80's. Yet we're acting like he's a bigger threat today than he's even been before? His army is a broken shell of what it was. He hasn't made any aggressive moves in the general directions of his border in 12 years. He doesn't even control all of his country. Put those factors together, it seems like it would be pretty friggin' simple to curb a guy who's basically put down already without having to put 300,000 US troops at risk.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

FiveB247

03-21-2003, 09:39 AM

And don't say inspections. They're a well-proven failure.

Iraq's nuclear program was completely taken apart due to UN Inspectors in 98'.

That's far from a failure.

HBox

03-21-2003, 10:36 AM

Maybe those WMDs you're afraid of

Yes. That's right. MAYBE. My only point is that unless we find them, this ain't worth it. You're right, there may be WMDs. That they have scuds implies they may have WMDs. But if there isn't, who cares if they have scuds. That's my whole point.

TheMojoPin

03-21-2003, 10:42 AM

But if there isn't, who cares if they have scuds

A lot of the pro-war people. But the scuds only theaten Iraq's neighbors and Israel. But the argument is that Iraq threatens US.

EEEEEEP!!! EEEEEEEP!!! ORRRRRRK!!! AH--AH!!!

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

FiveB247

03-21-2003, 11:12 AM

You're right, there may be WMDs. That they have scuds implies they may have WMDs.

I heard that it may imply they might be hiding this guy too...

http://www.n2.net/prey/bigfoot/images/artwork.jpg

This message was edited by FiveB247 on 3-21-03 @ 3:24 PM

FollowThisLogic

03-21-2003, 12:54 PM

Yes. That's right. MAYBE. My only point is that unless we find them, this ain't worth it. You're right, there may be WMDs. That they have scuds implies they may have WMDs. But if there isn't, who cares if they have scuds. That's my whole point.
But you're missing my point - which is, if they have scuds, which they were supposed to have gotten rid of 12 years ago (part of the resolution that ended the Gulf War), and kept them hidden well enough that we had no clue anything was there, what else don't we know about? They had been breaking that resolution for 12 years, but managed to keep that a secret. It's not like their deceptions were failing, they were pretty damn good at it. How good? No one knows.

When WMD are even a slight possibility, isn't "better safe than sorry" a better policy than "innocent until proven guilty"?

<center><img src="http://followthislogic.50megs.com/rf-screw.jpg" alt="Just say 'Screw all ya'll.' Trust me. It'll work."> <marquee direction=up scrollamount=1 height=14><center>all that i have all that i hold all that.. is wrong all that i feel for or trust in or love all that.. is gone </center> </marquee></center>

Death Metal Moe

03-23-2003, 12:59 PM

Iraq's nuclear program was completely taken apart due to UN Inspectors in 98'.

No, I think the Israeli hit on their reactor in the 80's was the REAL reason they never got a nuclear plant up and running.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

JiZ

03-23-2003, 01:06 PM

It was definately Israel's airstrike in 81' that took care of Iraq's nuclear capabilities. In fact, the Israeli astronaut that was recently killed aboard Columbia, took part in that strike. Just one more reason why Israel is the best country in the world.

"Peace will come only when Palestinians love their children more than they hate Jews"
Israel's Former PM
Golda Meir

Death Metal Moe

03-23-2003, 02:19 PM

No, America is the greatest country in the world, but Israel isn't that bad either.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

shamus mcfitzy

03-23-2003, 02:39 PM

No, America is the greatest country in the world, but Israel isn't that bad either.

That's an opinion too. I think that's what's crazy about America. We're all supposed to think we're the best. Israel is far from even the top 20 nations in my book, so whatever. I love living in the US, but i can honestly say that i don't believe that we're not the greatest country in the world.

I'm just tired at this point of arguing left vs. right. I think that Eugene Debs was one of the greatest Americans, yet he was imprisoned for being anti-America. History will paint the leftist protests as examples of how free speech works.

TheMojoPin

03-23-2003, 03:06 PM

History will paint the leftist protests as examples of how free speech works.

Nah, then they'll just call it "liberal whitewashing" or something...

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << FREE YERDADDY! >> "You can tell some lies about the good times you've had/But I've kissed your mother twice and now I'm working on your dad..."

JiZ

03-23-2003, 03:12 PM

We all have opinions that noone agrees with. I for one hate this country, yet I was born and raised here. Funny that when some people voice there opinions, others are quick to "warn" them to be careful. I am not a Saddam lover by far. Then again, I am not a lover of this country either. I am completely greatfull for what America can provide...I just don't think this is such a great country.

"Peace will come only when Palestinians love their children more than they hate Jews"
Israel's Former PM
Golda Meir

Death Metal Moe

03-23-2003, 03:16 PM

but i can honestly say that i don't believe that we're not the greatest country in the world.

Really?

With all it's problems, the USA is indeed the greatest country in the world.

<IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=njdmmoe">
<A HREF="http://www.unhallowed.com">www.unhallowed.com</A>
DEATH FACTION 4 LIFE!
<A HREF="http://www.pub21.ezboard.com/bonaarmy">JOIN THE O&A ARMY!!!</A>

The Jays

03-23-2003, 03:25 PM

Yes. That's right. MAYBE. My only point is that unless we find them, this ain't worth it. You're right, there may be WMDs. That they have scuds implies they may have WMDs. But if there isn't, who cares if they have scuds. That's my whole point.

Possesion of SCUDS is yet another violation of the ceasefire.

Also , failing to provide evidence of disarmament of Iraq's chemical and biological programs is another violation of the ceasefire.

And showing POW faces on television, giving out their names, is against the Geneva Convention.

 Fuck what you heard.
 That cab has a dent in it. [center]
[center]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morecoolestgroup/files/house.gif