Author Topic: Iraq, Bush gets an A+ (Read 933 times)

NUKE · « **on:** January 26, 2003, 04:45:02 PM »

The only reason inspectors are back in Iraq is because Bush took a hard line in dealing with them, in case anyone noticed.

Iraq's agreements for ending the gulf war will be enforced one way or another under Bush. Someone want to tell me why enforcing the cease fire agreements with Iraq is a bad thing?

As of right now, we are not at war with Iraq and inspectors are back again. This drives the liberals crazy for some reason.

By Bush having an actual set of balls, we can now speak the only language people like Saddam understand.

Dowding · « **Reply #1 on:** January 26, 2003, 04:51:30 PM »

You have a short memory. Bush didn't want to go the UN route and he certainly didn't want to go with the inspectors thing.

He was persuaded otherwise by Blair and others. Given the choice, Bush would be in Iraq now.

Quote

By Bush having an actual set of balls, we can now speak the only language people like Saddam understand.

15 years ago the only language that seemed to coming out of Washington et al included a blank cheque book, crates of arms and access to biological and chemical weapons development.

My, how times have changed.

NUKE · « **Reply #2 on:** January 26, 2003, 05:18:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
You have a short memory. Bush didn't want to go the UN route and he certainly didn't want to go with the inspectors thing.

He was persuaded otherwise by Blair and others. Given the choice, Bush would be in Iraq now.

15 years ago the only language that seemed to coming out of Washington et al included a blank cheque book, crates of arms and access to biological and chemical weapons development.

My, how times have changed.

You miss the point entirely. Bush made a no nonsense, tough stand against Iraq which then caused the matter to be discussed. The UN passed Bush's version ( pretty close) of a last chance resolution regarding Iraq. Bush put military reality behind the UN's resolutions. If not for Bush's policy of getting tough, we probably wouldnt even have a UN resolution, and if we did it would be ignored by Iraq, as was the case before Bush put muscle into the equation.

Any way I look at it, it's working. I'm very pleased that Iraq is finnally going to be bound by what they agreed to after the Gulf War.

As for 15 years ago, what does that have to do with Bush today? I said that we finnally have a President with some balls.

I guess you didn't read my whole post.

capt. apathy · « **Reply #3 on:** January 26, 2003, 05:22:20 PM »

the main problem is that the inspections are taking too long. there's no way bush can use this war to get another term if it doesn't start soon.

10Bears · « **Reply #4 on:** January 26, 2003, 06:11:16 PM »

Nuke, the war is schedueled to start next Wed... France, Germany, Pootie-Poo, and China all said they're voting no...

So he could be starting ww3 by thumbing his nose at the UN.. All kinds of complications.. On the other hand, Bush would sure look like a wimp standing down--- cost millions of dollars to keep those troops out there. The inspectors said it could take months even a year.

I'd say he's in between Iraq and a hard place.

NUKE · « **Reply #5 on:** January 26, 2003, 06:23:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 10Bears
Nuke, the war is schedueled to start next Wed... France, Germany, Pootie-Poo, and China all said they're voting no...

So he could be starting ww3 by thumbing his nose at the UN.. All kinds of complications.. On the other hand, Bush would sure look like a wimp standing down--- cost millions of dollars to keep those troops out there. The inspectors said it could take months even a year.

I'd say he's in between Iraq and a hard place.

He wouldn't be thumbing his nose at the UN, he would be enforcing it's resolution. The last resolution was very specific in regards to the steps Iraq had to take to comply. Iraq is already in breach of the agreement in many areas, including not allowing U2 over-flights, failure to list what happened to tons of chemical weapons that the previous inspectors listed.

Thrawn · « **Reply #6 on:** January 26, 2003, 06:41:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
including not allowing U2 over-flights,

What a bunch of crap, U2 has no plans on going to Iraq.

"U2's publicist RMP London announced today that despite reports to the contrary, Bono will not be visiting Iraq. "There is no truth whatsoever to this story," a spokesperson said. "Bono continues to campaign for many issues relating to debt, AIDS and trade in Africa, but he has no involvement in this issue and no plan to visit Iraq." "

10Bears · « **Reply #7 on:** January 26, 2003, 07:50:24 PM »

A telling sign is if the inspectors are told to leave the country next Tues night.

If the inspectors say they need more time say 3 months to a year, Bush won't stand for it he'll either attack Wed as schedueled or make some kind of spin about how he's a great man of peace and how many people would be killed an' all. There would be a tactful unpublicised pullout, they can't hold 153,000 troops standing around for no 6 months. That toejam cost millions a day just to keep em' on station right now.

he would be enforcing it's resolution. The last resolution was very specific in regards to the steps Iraq had to take to comply

But that's not for Bush to decide it's the security council and they already plan to vote no.. remember it's UN resolutions he's violating not U.S resolutions.

I wondered why the evil Hittelerlly voted with Bush to go along with the inspections Smart... damn smart but still evil She knew that this would place Bush in a box

Bush goes ahead and attacks anyway it is he, not saddam who becomes world boggyman in the view of the rest of the world.

"But but he used gas on his own people!"
he used gas on the Kurds not Iraquies.. the Kurds want to cut out a large section of northern Iraq -- not that the use of gas is cool-- but the CIA guys, the ones that sold him the stuff wanted to see the effect.. This wasn't a news story back in '88.

"But he's an evil dictator!"
So are all those other nut cases in the middle east.. go to Saudi Arabia where they wack your hands off for stealing.. or Iran where they hang you by your gizzered... All Saddam does is poke your eyes out with spoons. Not bad for middle east standards.

capt. apathy · « **Reply #8 on:** January 26, 2003, 08:10:19 PM »

He wouldn't be thumbing his nose at the UN, he would be enforcing it's resolution.
___________________

that’s a lot like saying a vigilante isn't breaking the law. he's enforcing the law as he sees it. doing what the courts and cops can't or won't do.

you can't go against the UN vote, and then say you are doing it in support of the UN.

NUKE · « **Reply #9 on:** January 26, 2003, 08:20:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by capt. apathy
He wouldn't be thumbing his nose at the UN, he would be enforcing it's resolution.
___________________

that’s a lot like saying a vigilante isn't breaking the law. he's enforcing the law as he sees it. doing what the courts and cops can't or won't do.

you can't go against the UN vote, and then say you are doing it in support of the UN.

The UN did vote, and created the resolution. What are you talking about?

-dead- · « **Reply #10 on:** January 26, 2003, 10:06:51 PM »

Since when did the US care about enforcing UN Security Council resolutions anyway? They don't seem to be going after the top 2 violators of UN Security Council resolutions - Israel and Turkey.

Saurdaukar · « **Reply #11 on:** January 26, 2003, 11:25:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by -dead-
Since when did the US care about enforcing UN Security Council resolutions anyway? They don't seem to be going after the top 2 violators of UN Security Council resolutions - Israel and Turkey.

What - and give the rest of the world something ELSE to whine about?

-dead- · « **Reply #12 on:** January 27, 2003, 09:36:44 AM »

hehe why not - things are a bit slow in the run up to the release of "Bush Vs Hussein2: The sequel of all sequels" & it's been a while since we've had a "sh*t is burning" special on CNN - I say the US should rile up a few more a few more loonies for all our viewing pleasure. The rest of the world has come to expect two things from the US since the late sixties: comedy novelty presidents and lots of really expensive firework shows. All power to you on the latest president - surrealist comedy at its finest - but you're falling behind on the fireworks: pull your fingers out! You've haven't invaded anyone for weeks!

There was that whiney enough for you?

Hortlund · « **Reply #13 on:** January 27, 2003, 09:45:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by 10Bears
"But but he used gas on his own people!"
he used gas on the Kurds not Iraquies.. the Kurds want to cut out a large section of northern Iraq -- not that the use of gas is cool-- but the CIA guys, the ones that sold him the stuff wanted to see the effect.. This wasn't a news story back in '88.

[/b]
Are you completely INSANE? Does it matter who the civilians were?

And your lame attempt at spinning this to some CIA operation is beyond pathetic.

Ping · « **Reply #14 on:** January 28, 2003, 06:59:21 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hortlund

Are you completely INSANE? Does it matter who the civilians were?

And your lame attempt at spinning this to some CIA operation is beyond pathetic. [/B]

Hortlund Maybe you should look into these allegations. They are True.