Author Topic: We get a war - oh yay, LGB's on CNN! :D (Read 1398 times)

Staga · « **Reply #45 on:** October 08, 2002, 01:27:57 PM »

In 1939 Germany was the invader and agressor, 1990 Iraq took that job and it sure looks like 2003 the agressor will be U.S.
Not that I care: during Gulf-war CNN and BBC did show some really nice footage

Just remember that some of your own will die, maybe even inside of the borders of U.S.
Attacking against arab country when situation in the middle-east is what it is now could bring those nations together which would be worst thing what could happen now.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #46 on:** October 08, 2002, 01:31:01 PM »

Staga, as you know, we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't. Either way, the outcome will be the same.

Eagler · « **Reply #47 on:** October 08, 2002, 01:40:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Staga, as you know, we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't. Either way, the outcome will be the same.

pay me now or pay me later

as batdog stated, the bill seems to be slightly less expensive today than it will be tomorrow

I hope we can get the inspectors inspecting like the nutbag agreed to in '91

I hope they abide by the signed agreement of '91, the country realizes it'd be better off with someone else running the show and THEY take there future in THEIR own hands joining the global community

... just don't think any of it'll happen until the Global robo cop, the US of A kicks his sandflea arse outa their

too many scared thumb twiddlers for it to go any other way

Hristo · « **Reply #48 on:** October 08, 2002, 01:47:33 PM »

US govt asked number of countries to sign an agreement where US soldiers can only be trialed in US for future warcrimes, and not by any UN or local govt body.

Is Bush clan up to something ?

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #49 on:** October 08, 2002, 01:55:05 PM »

Is Bush clan up to something ?

World Domination....

ve vill crush you! Ze Third Reich will prevail!

In any event, if it makes a peaceful tommorrow... I'm all for it... but this sitting around and playing pocket pool until the big toejam hits the fan ain't exactly working towards world peace or anything remotely resembling it.
-SW

Modas · « **Reply #50 on:** October 08, 2002, 02:43:46 PM »

Something that I haven't seen yet is whether or not the UN inspectors have to give notice to Iraq regarding which site they want to see (i.e. a weeks notice etc). It may have been someplace but I've missed it.

What I would like to see is this, as an alternative to going to all out invasion.

The U.S. puts 3 a/c in the air, loaded for bear. The U.N. inspectors say, "we want to see this site, today. (with no head up notice). If Iraq says no, or hesitates, those 3 a/c go in and remove that site from the map within the hour. Done.

This process continues until the U.N. has unrestricted acess or Iraq is out of targets.

Listening to monkey boy last night didn't inspire my confidence one bit. He's bound and determined to bring home some body bags

my .02 worth

MrLars · « **Reply #51 on:** October 08, 2002, 03:05:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CavemanJ

Instead of an all out war why not just send sniper teams into Iraq and basically cut the head off the snake one night

My COD, do you people actualy think that we would contemplate going to war without having prior ground assesment? Believe me, we do have and have had operatives incountry gathering intellegence and waiting for orders to act on.

The assumption that we would go into battle without having previously located, assesed and identified likely targets by using intellegence gathered on the ground shows a lack of knowledge of modern warfare.

We are there and I would bet that on more than a few occasions Saddam himself has been in one of our operatives scopes crosshairs.

The fact that we haven't acted during these opportunitys shows that we are indeed using restraint. How long that restraint will last rests solely on Saddams shoulders.

Sandman · « **Reply #52 on:** October 08, 2002, 03:13:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Interesting what sort of images you could find to be entertaining and amusing Dowding.

And I put the these serious pictures up to make a serious point of what people like you let can happen because of their foolish fearful "anti-war" sentiments in dealing with maniac dictators. They had the same exuses and tactics of your types today, oh Hitler is reasonable, oh Hitler just wants to be left alone, oh Hitler can be contained, oh why bother with Hitler hes just a two bit agitator, oh dont worry about him we are building this huge wall of forts and will deter him, oh shut up warmongering has been politican churchil, oh this and oh that then all of a sudden oh toejam
50 million people die.

Was this before or after he invaded Poland?

john9001 · « **Reply #53 on:** October 08, 2002, 03:18:24 PM »

the USA did not "invade" Somalia. the warlords in Somalia were stealing the food aid from the starving people. the US troops went in to get the food to the people.

then clinton became prez and pulled out the marines and their tanks and left the rangers without support, officers in Somalia asked clinton to send the tanks back in but clinton said , no , it would make the USA look like a aggressor.

44MAG

midnight Target · « **Reply #54 on:** October 08, 2002, 03:21:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler

---snip---
I hope we can get the inspectors inspecting like the nutbag agreed to in '91

I hope they abide by the signed agreement of '91, the country realizes it'd be better off with someone else running the show and THEY take there future in THEIR own hands joining the global community ---snip---

Funny, almost exactly what I have been saying, but I am a hand wringing, USA hater? Go figure.

MrLars · « **Reply #55 on:** October 08, 2002, 04:34:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target

Funny, almost exactly what I have been saying, but I am a hand wringing, USA hater? Go figure.

Don't take the Rights hate mongering to heart Mid. That is and has been their tactic whenever a discussion about politics arises.

That is why a two party system is so damned important...to keep the radicals on both sides in check.

There's an old tag that is used for describing a rabid Rep. "Yellow dog Democrat". The concept that ANY canidate that is Republican is better than any Democrat on any given ballot is not only flawed but history has shown that it's even dangerous. The reverse is also true.

I am on the political fence on most things but one important reason I'm not a goose stepping Republican is that they, for the most part, cannot see the benifits and the NECESSITY of having a two party system.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #56 on:** October 08, 2002, 05:53:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM

Was this before or after he invaded Poland?

Excellent question! This was during the time he was annexing Austria, annexing the Sudetenland (thx chamberlin ) and later openly invading the rest of Czechoslovakia, breaking most Versailles treaty obligations, just a bit before invading Poland - which when everyone apparently agreed he was a pretty bad guy.

So I ask you "anti-war" types today what will your Poland be? Perhaps an Iraqi nuke in Tel Aviv?

CavemanJ · « **Reply #57 on:** October 08, 2002, 06:08:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MrLars

My COD, do you people actualy think that we would contemplate going to war without having prior ground assesment? Believe me, we do have and have had operatives incountry gathering intellegence and waiting for orders to act on.

The assumption that we would go into battle without having previously located, assesed and identified likely targets by using intellegence gathered on the ground shows a lack of knowledge of modern warfare.

We are there and I would bet that on more than a few occasions Saddam himself has been in one of our operatives scopes crosshairs.

The fact that we haven't acted during these opportunitys shows that we are indeed using restraint. How long that restraint will last rests solely on Saddams shoulders.

Ermm..... ok.....

I'm thinking you misunderstood what I'm saying with that.

Yes I'm fully aware the intel gathering apparatus is in high gear and keeping target lists updated.

But what I'm saying is instead of feeding the updated target data to all the planes/tanks/helos/infantrymen, send in some sniper teams and give them the updated target data. Then let the snipers do thier thing and wipe out the Sodamn Insane regime and see what fills the gap. If the next one is just as bad knock it out too, etc etc.

Why go and get a buncha folks killed when several small teams can sneak around do the job in a surgical manner?

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #58 on:** October 08, 2002, 06:37:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Saintaw
Not intended at you personally Grunherz (cfr last reply). Just tired of the olde "USA knows what's best for you, blah blah...". And I did not see the point you had by putting those ugly pictures on my face.We've seen those enough.

You just look like you're anticipating/already drooling about this. Maybe I'm missreading you. I hope I am.

What do you think will happens next if Iraq is flattened ? That all the middle east is going on it's knees and beg you ? come on...

Anyway... cya tomorrow, I have a date at 21:00!

I know you did not see the point of those picture and that is the problem. Prewar inaction helped cause those pictures. No more inaction!

MrLars · « **Reply #59 on:** October 08, 2002, 06:56:53 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CavemanJ

Ermm..... ok.....

I'm thinking you misunderstood what I'm saying with that.

Sorry Cave, that response wasn't directed at you but more to the majority of people that tend to dismiss or forget that we have a very active intelligence community with their hands in most if not all of these targeted countries.

The problem with using snipers to take out Saddam is that, w/o internal change, that would most likely backfire in a very ugly way. The best way to peace in Iraq with a regime change is for the populace to revolt and get rid of Saddam the same way the Itialians did with Mosolini, the image of the Iraqi's stripping, hanging and desecrating Saddams body would go far in improving US/Iraqi relations....and put a huge smile on my mug

The use of snipers would cause the US to loose even more support from friendlies, something I don't think we can afford.