More reasons to stay out of Iraq

[Sandman]

Don't start the second Gulf War.

[Sikboy]

Cato is nothing but a liberal suckhole spouting the crap agenda of the looney left

-Sikboy

[Sandman]

LOL... well, the guy did work for Reagan.

[miko2d]

Originally posted by Sikboy
Cato is nothing but a liberal suckhole spouting the crap agenda of the looney left
-Sikboy

 They are libertarian, not liberal.

 miko

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by miko2d

 They are libertarian, not liberal.

 miko

I know Miko, I was just pulling Sandman's chain. CATO often falls on the GOP side of the fence. That makes his source extra tasty, and IMHO, it makes this post worth a bunch more than if he quoted an article out of The Village Voice.

I'm a big fan of the Cato Institute.

-Sikboy

[midnight Target]

Didn't Cato work for the Green Lantern? Or was that the guy who lived with OJ?

[Sikboy]

Hey Target,

Check your email

-Sikboy

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Sikboy


I know Miko, I was just pulling Sandman's chain. CATO often falls on the GOP side of the fence. That makes his source extra tasty, and IMHO, it makes this post worth a bunch more than if he quoted an article out of The Village Voice.

I'm a big fan of the Cato Institute.

-Sikboy

I download Cato to my PDA every day. I get the feeling that they don't much appreciate Dubya.

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Sikboy
Hey Target,

Check your email

-Sikboy

Back atcha

[fdiron]

"Hey look everybody, I gave Hitler part of Europe, and now he promised he wouldn't invade anywhere else!"  Says Prime Minister Chamberland.

Every ten years or so the U.S. needs to invade somewhere just to stay in fighting shape.  Saddam is doing something sneaky in his weapons factory, very similar to what Germany did in the post-World War 1 years.  

The U.S. lost less guys in the Gulf War than the peace time average for military deaths (training accidents, natural deaths, drunk driving).  

What could be the worst thing to happen if we invaded?  Bad economy? Too late.  Perhaps terrorist would attack the U.S.?  Already happened.  Israel and Palestine would re-new attacks?  They never slowed down.

If we don't stop Hussein, it wont be too long until Quaeda starts comming into the U.S. with nuclear weapons.

[Fishu]

would be a good time to get rid of some dust which wasn't removed in 1991.
...this time US could actually help iraqi civilians, instead of just going in and out.
Just like they say they're doing in afganistan.....

[miko2d]

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
I download Cato to my PDA every day. I get the feeling that they don't much appreciate Dubya.

 Dubya is a freaking embarassment. It would have been better to have Gore in the White House and have a clear shot at him ridiculing his liberal policies.
 What are you going to do when you endorse a supposedly conservative candidate and he conducts liberal policies - or at least caves in and allowes them...

fdiron: If we don't stop Hussein, it wont be too long until Quaeda starts comming into the U.S. with nuclear weapons.
 I do not see how those two statements are connected. Al-Qaeda will be coming after us regardless of what happens to Hussein. Their natures are too different for them to cooperate - unless we force them to. There is no evidence of such cooperation. They would much rather have us topple anti-religionist Hussein. Then they will have a shot of taking over Iraq.

 miko

[wulfie]

The funniest thing ignored by the press:

Everyone who was a part of the coalition in 1991 has at least some obligation to support further military action vs. Iraq.

Why?

Free access to Iraq's weapons programs by U.N. weapons inspection teams *was one of the key points of the cease fire that left Hussein in power and kept Iraq from being invaded and 'reorganized'*.

Plain and simple - no debate possible - Iraq is in violation of a cease fire it signed before the U.N.

Which is why you see Iraq talking more and more about allowing weapons inspection teams back into their country...as it becomes more and more apparent that they may be seriously attacked.

Every Nation who was a part of that coalition in 1991, every Nation who believes in the authority of the U.N. - if they disagree with Iraq being attacked and Hussein being overthrown then they had better make a significantly better effort to coerce Iraq into *abiding by the terms of the cease fire agreement that it signed off on*.

When (WHEN - unless his development is interrupted) Hussein accquires a relatively crude low yield nuclear device, do you really think he'll have a hard time finding 5 suicidal terrorists to transport it to Tel Aviv and set it off? If he's caught doing this...so what? He's just become the greatest hero of the bad side of the Arabic world. Do you think an Israeli counterstrike would actually find Hussein? Not likely. Does he care if 4 million of his slave-citizens die in said counterstrike? Absolutely not. Would the entire middle East erupt into an everyone vs. Israel, the U.S.A., and whoever else gives a damn that Israel is allowed to exist? For certain.

2 very simple questions for everyone:

1. Do you believe that Hussein will accquire a nuclear weapon within the next 10 years if his efforts to not do so are 'interrupted'?

2. Do you think that no evil will come to pass if he accquires such a weapon?

Mike/wulfie

[wulfie]

miko2d points out another thing commonly mistated by the press and 'experts' on the internet everywhere:

Hussein is *not* a supporter of fundamentalist Islam. He has brutally beaten down fundamentalist Islamic movements that have tried to gain a foothold in Iraq.

Which is why you see various Iraqis being presented as potential 'Kings' (as in royalty as opposed to religous rule) of Iraq if and when Hussein is overthrown.

miko2d - leaving Iraq's nuclear weapons program unmolested would certainly make it *easier* for anti U.S./Israel/U.K. terrorists to accquire a nuclear weapon. He doesn't support fundamentalist Islam but he'd sure as heck use them as a weapon vs. his enemies. Giving them a bomb to use vs. Israel is not the same as allowing them to have a presence in his dictatorship.

Mike/wulfie

[weazel]

Henry Kissinger recently advised Bush against invading Iraq.

Also a top advisor from the Bush Sr administration has reportedly done the same unless substantial proof showing  Iraqi involvment in 9/11 is demonstrated.