War with Iraq
 

Whoever is watching CNN, and gonna watch the State of the union speech tonight, it is clear we are 100% going to war with Iraq and in the meantime.... North Korea is accusing us of planning an attack against them.. what u guys think? eek:

Lets rock eek:

eye-rack eh? BURN HER!!!

At this point, either shit or get off the pot. Do it or don't. I'm sick of my gas prices going from 66 cents/litre to 79 cents/litre.

mad:

Zone

its all a dog and pony show, state of the union

As I posted before, just wait until Febuary 15th.

you've posted before? oOo:

but i agree with zoner, let's bomb the stubfucks already i'm getting impatient

Yeah, we had a thread about this a week or two ago. Right now, Bush is getting his war doctrines approved by the capital, and all those higher-ups. Then, he's going to meet with the Secretary of the Army, Colin Powell, sopposevly Schwartznakoff (however you spell his name) and his leading military intelligence General, whomever that is to discuss how they are going to carry out their actions.

While these preperations are being made, US troops are rallying in Kuwait, Turkey, and the boarders of Israel. Right now, we have about 125,000 troops in the Middle East awaiting orders. Bush wants 250,000 by the 2nd week of Febuary. He plans a strike within the third week, or the beginning of March. This war won't be as short as the one in 1991, it will go on for a few months maybe until another agreement is reached. I doubt they'll take out Saddam.

Y they rallying troops near Israel?

Sorry, I got my news headlines mixed up, lol I was reading about Israel & Palestine.

The troops are actually rallying up @ Kuwait, the boarder of Saudi Arabia & Jordan, and Turkey.

I think the US are gonna start WW3 just because their board & have nothing else to do.like whats their reason? the weapons inspectors havent found a thing .

[quote="Sargent_Scrotum":4430d]I think the US are gonna start WW3 just because their board & have nothing else to do.like whats their reason? the weapons inspectors havent found a thing .[/quote:4430d]

I dunno, I got mixed thoughts about this. Saddam is like the hackers here whom have claimed to have gone clean, you know? Bush just dosen't trust em, and he can do without him. So, in his plot to eliminate terrorism, he wants to take out Saddam because he thinks he has ties to Al Queda. That's my take on it, anyways.

this war sucks

BTW i heard an interesting thing the other day, you know the US is saying how he used all those chemical weapons on his own people? it was orignally the US that sold iraq all the chemical weapons back when they were buds.

Sorry guys...I hadda post this. I support Bush, I really do, but this was too funny!

http://www.webdesignlab.co.uk/niksthings/masking.html


Zone

LOL

Well Scrotum, the same thing with Afghanistan. They used to be allied, and we gave em money & weapns too. Then, Osama came around.

Osama likes teh cok

Well now I know what monkeys evolved from....

As far as the impending War with Iraq goes..... I think anyone that read any of my previous post knows where I stand..... If we invade we will win, Iraqi cilivian casualitie will be high(Saddam does not care about them, should we?)
Terrorism will increase tenfold, Bush will hand the extremeist another reason to hate America. We will find find weapons of mass distruction in Iraq, even if there are not any there today.

I heard something very funny today on Bill O'Reilly. All of these celebrities that are against any kind of war with Iraq, seem to always stick to their "it's for the oil, we have no proof" stories. Well, Alec Baldwin is one of those celebrities, who is a big activist for PETA. He is balls to the wall about protecting the rights of animals, preventing cruelty and so on. Well, apparently he could give a shit if a HUMAN BEING in Iraq is being raped/murdered/tortured because it is too far away for them to even care about it. It's all BS. Saddam kills his own people, forces them to do what he pleases, and if anyone apposes him they are jailed or even worse killed. Just look at the last election...he was the only person running for presidency! Everyone in the country is too scared to run against him. No one has the freedom of speech, and Saddam continues to lie about what weapons he has and where they are. How can people be against war, when every other attempt at diplomacy has failed with this maniac?

Now, the difference between this war and the Gulf War is that the US will actually stay there, and help rebuild a democratic government. This will cost money, but we will take over their oil...it's the spoils of war. What, are we supposed to go in their, do the world a favor and take Saddam out of office, and then just hand over the oil to some terrorist supporting country? Come on now people wake up. I can't wait to see what evidence we have on Iraq that Bush plans to reveal next week. Hopefully it will be hard evidence that Saddam is hiding weapons of mass destruction. Then we'll just see how fast the rest of the countries come on board and say " Ah, we knew it the whole time. We were just holding out for political reasons"

but where exactly does it say that we have to waste our own people to overthrow other people's dictators?

People have to liberate themselves from an oppressive regime (like in teh American Revolution) or no good will come of it.
What would happen if the French decided that King George III was too cruel and decided to "liberate" the colonies, hell the colonists would be fighting the French.

Ao we just let these dictators killl their own people and develope weapons to either use on the US and our Allies, or sell them to terrorist states? That is ridiculous. It would be easier to say that before 9-11, because before that I'm sure we all thought "why go into afganistan? They have no way of attacking us? So what if the Taliban are ruthless and support terrorism. It can't affect us" . Well look where it has gotten us. What will you say when Iraq launches a chemical warhead into Isreal? "Ah, they had coming to them. It's not their land anyway". Or, worse yet, what if you had a relative in Iraq, or in the military near Iraq who was killed by an attack of either terrorism or by Saddam himself? The Iraqi people will not be able to overthrow Saddam or his cabinet. Look what ahppened in the Gulf War, we destroyed virtually the entire army and when the people tried to rise up they were all slaughtered. Imagine what would happen now when the army is close to what it was in numbers as 12 years ago (without the armor).

Let me also ask you this, what if this happened to Canada? What if the dictator was right next door to us? The how would you feel? Would you be a little more concerned?

Yes we do. If we think it's benefitial to our interest, a dictator or government can do anything they want to their people(ie. Saddam gassing the kurds, at that time we felt Iran was the real threat and we need Saddam as an ally.

While you heard that, you must not of heard about the flyers being handed out in iraq wanting Saddam out, and the anti-war protests.
These iraqi civilians arent too scared to turn against Saddam and his followers.

I've seen a report on Iraq's "WMDs",
they're botulism bombs they were testing have a 33% chance of killing test animals within 25 meters of the hit. An M-2 fragmentation grenade has a 50% chance to kill anything within 25 meters, so is a frag nade considered a WMD now?

[quote="Sgt Stryker":1b3ce]
I've seen a report on Iraq's "WMDs",
they're botulism bombs they were testing have a 33% chance of killing test animals within 25 meters of the hit. An M-2 fragmentation grenade has a 50% chance to kill anything within 25 meters, so is a frag nade considered a WMD now?[/quote:1b3ce]

No an M-2 Frag grenade is not considered a WMD, it is a conventional weapon. WMD are Chemical, Biological or Nuclear.

[quote:25feb]h(Saddam does not care about them, should we?) [/quote:25feb] but if you do that arent you just as bad as them?

[quote="Sargent_Scrotum":a2eda][quote:a2eda]h(Saddam does not care about them, should we?) [/quote:a2eda] but if you do that arent you just as bad as them?[/quote:a2eda]

If I care about civilans, am I just as bad as who?

if you dont, then dosent that make you just as bad as sadam?

[quote="Sargent_Scrotum":1edd9]if you dont, then dosent that make you just as bad as sadam?[/quote:1edd9]

Yes that was the point I was trying to make.

Who's gonna watch the State of the Union address tonight? one of the local channels WB11 won't broadcast of it cause of smallville

[quote="Pfc.Green":699c2][quote="Sgt Stryker":699c2]
I've seen a report on Iraq's "WMDs",
their botulism bombs they were testing have a 33% chance of killing test animals within 25 meters of the hit. An M-2 fragmentation grenade has a 50% chance to kill anything within 25 meters, so is a frag nade considered a WMD now?[/quote:699c2]

No an M-2 Frag grenade is not considered a WMD, it is a conventional weapon. WMD are Chemical, Biological or Nuclear.[/quote:699c2]

that was sarcasm.
My point is that Iraq's WMDs are less effective than a good old frag grenade.

I would like to see Saddam gone but Bush is going about it in the wrong way. First we must loosen our grip, so agents can get undercover in Iraq easier, the inevitable terrorist ties would turn up by teh end of the year, plenty of time then to bomb the crap out of Saddam, with 99% of our people suporting it (because of undeniable proof).

[quote:db79b]This will cost money, but we will take over their oil...it's the spoils of war[/quote:db79b]

Saddam is most likely to burn them up.....