[BallisticWookie]

[quote="Sargent_Scrotum":6aed1]if thwho cares why they like him? if they like him, they like him. let them like who they like. america should mind its own fucking buisness..[/quote:6aed1]

And you sir should buy a fucking clue. Moron.

[Bazooka_Joe]

Finally. Well its Sunday now, did they really disarm them or is it BS?

[Miscguy]

Originally Posted by newbieassulted

we got nukes, we got bio weapons, we got ICBMs, but they arnt allowed to have them.

The united states destroyed all of it chemical, biological agents, that could kill or maim. Meaning we do not have antrax, smallpox, or other chemical biological weapons of mass destruction. WE do however have a nuclear policy that allows for retalitory strikes. IE if the US, or an allie is attacked with chem/bio/nuclear weapons the US policy allows us to nuke you in return. I assure you ours are bigger, and better.

The key differance here is that the US has extensive controls over its weapons of mass destruction. Where as Iraq has a mad man with control issues at the button. He has used them on his own people to put down a rebellion. Im sorry but if your people are attempting to over throw you, that tells me you are not liked.

As for nothing being in the UN resolutions about a regeim change. What do you think will happen if saddam is left in power? Well i image he will continue to fuck with the UN and bullshit until he has the weapons he so desires. 10 years down the road we'll be going through this bullshit again, all because we backed out a 2nd time.

Grow a pair of nuts you god damn pussy's.

they destroyed *4* i feel much safer now

[guarnere]

hey, but think of it as every bomb destroyed, is human lives saved biggrin:

[BallisticWookie]

Originally Posted by Miscguy

The united states destroyed all of it chemical, biological agents, that could kill or maim. Meaning we do not have antrax, smallpox, or other chemical biological weapons of mass destruction. WE do however have a nuclear policy that allows for retalitory strikes. IE if the US, or an allie is attacked with chem/bio/nuclear weapons the US policy allows us to nuke you in return. I assure you ours are bigger, and better.

The key differance here is that the US has extensive controls over its weapons of mass destruction. Where as Iraq has a mad man with control issues at the button. He has used them on his own people to put down a rebellion. Im sorry but if your people are attempting to over throw you, that tells me you are not liked.

As for nothing being in the UN resolutions about a regeim change. What do you think will happen if saddam is left in power? Well i image he will continue to fuck with the UN and bullshit until he has the weapons he so desires. 10 years down the road we'll be going through this bullshit again, all because we backed out a 2nd time.

Grow a pair of nuts you god damn pussy's.

Here here !!

Originally Posted by guarnere

hey, but think of it as every bomb destroyed, is human lives saved biggrin:

not really

destroying some missiles = stalling tactic
more time = nukes if he doesn't have them already

therefore every bomb destroyed = more risk of kaboom ed:

[Milla]

Originally Posted by Miscguy

The united states destroyed all of it chemical, biological agents, that could kill or maim. Meaning we do not have antrax, smallpox, or other chemical biological weapons of mass destruction. WE do however have a nuclear policy that allows for retalitory strikes. IE if the US, or an allie is attacked with chem/bio/nuclear weapons the US policy allows us to nuke you in return. I assure you ours are bigger, and better.

The key differance here is that the US has extensive controls over its weapons of mass destruction. Where as Iraq has a mad man with control issues at the button. He has used them on his own people to put down a rebellion. Im sorry but if your people are attempting to over throw you, that tells me you are not liked.

As for nothing being in the UN resolutions about a regeim change. What do you think will happen if saddam is left in power? Well i image he will continue to fuck with the UN and bullshit until he has the weapons he so desires. 10 years down the road we'll be going through this bullshit again, all because we backed out a 2nd time.

Grow a pair of nuts you god damn pussy's.

you say everything i want to or try to say, but it always comes out wrong, i love you and wookie biggrin:

[Sergeant_Scrotum]

*sigh* arguing with people online is useless.

[quote="Sargent_Scrotum":b7e3f]*sigh* arguing with people online is useless.[/quote:b7e3f]

...no it's not

[Hurricane11]

we could only expect that answer from strik0r oOo:

Most of the people in Iraq dont like saddam, but as stated earlier, they get killed if they oppose him. He gasses his own people, he creates elections where hes the only candidate, they have no choide but to like him.

Also, duh we have no chemical or biological weapons, that just obvious.

And, the US can stick there nose in whatever they want becuase Iraq concerns more than just Iraq. remember those scuds, what did they do with them last time? Shot them at Israel (an allie). They gas there own people (can you say holocaust?) and Saddam is obviously irresponsible with weapons and the rules of the UN. Regime change is necessary becuase Saddam is a dangerous dictator.

[Hurricane11]

thats what i was tryin to say earlier

[Old Reliable]

sorry but the only way to do that is to invade iraq, UAE asking him to step down is bullshit

Bingo