Author Topic: First Korea, now Iran (Read 1972 times)

Hangtime · « **Reply #30 on:** March 10, 2003, 09:53:51 PM »

blitz, please post your longitude and latitude coordinates.

Thanks, and have a nice day!

Hang

blitz is threatend by hangtime in no way, it's just plain rediculous.

Toad · « **Reply #31 on:** March 10, 2003, 10:00:59 PM »

I think Iraq IS a threat to the US.

I think Iraq IS a threat to other countries besides the US.

I think Hussein is a distinct and terrible threat to the population of Iraq.

Doesn't make me feel "unsafe" or "afraid" though.

Que sera, sera.

I've said here on this BBS before that I feel it is inevitable that the US will eventually be hit with a WMD strike. I think the death toll will make Pearl Harbor or the WTC disasters look minimal in comparison.

However, I think the retribution we extract will similarly make that event look minimal.

And don't trouble yourself telling me that we may not have "proof" or a "smoking gun". I seriously doubt we'll be that demanding of our evidence. I think there will be a medium size list of places that we think may have done it and that will be all we need.

Terrifying thought, eh?

This is all just my specualation, however. So don't read too much into it.

Still, I think this is where the failure of the UN to act against dictators like Hussein will lead. I can almost imagine no other ending beside nuclear catclysm.

The "civilized world" can no longer distinguish between "good" and "evil". Everything must be gray. What's black may be white, what's white may well be black.

Therein lies the end of the human race, eventually.

Toad · « **Reply #32 on:** March 10, 2003, 10:02:16 PM »

I'm sure all the "shades of gray" folks just love Bill O'Reilly. He just wrote a fairly decent column.

And, lucky for you, I've decided to share it with yas!

Quote

From billoreilly.com

The New Nazi's
By: Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com
Thursday, Mar 06, 2003

It is absolutely eerie how closely the current Iraq situation parallels the rise of The Third Reich 70 years ago.

I consider Saddam Hussein to be "Hitler lite" because he has the same virulent anti-semitism, the same callous disregard for human life, and the identical lust for power that Adolf possessed.

The only difference between the two villains is the size of the moustache.

Back in the 1930's, millions the world over simply did not want to think about the evil that Hitler was brewing up.

France and Russia were the chief appeasers, as they are today on the Iraq question.

Stalin ultimately signed a treaty with Hitler making it possible for him to use most of his forces to crush Europe, and France simply allowed Hitler to violate the Treaty of Versailles, even more than the 17 times Saddam has violated current UN mandates.

Britain went along with France in the '30's, but now it seems the UK has learned from its historical mistakes.

And then there's the Pope. John Paul II recently came out and said that any war against Iraq would be "immoral."

Back in the '30's, Pope Pius XII actually supported Hitler politically, at least in the beginning of his rise when Pius was stationed in Germany.

The Third Reich was considered a bulwark against Communism, which the Church greatly feared.

Subsequently, Pius kept quiet about the atrocities of Hitler's regime because he knew that the Vatican itself could easily be vanquished by the Huns.

Today, John Paul deplores the violence that comes with any war but is at a loss to explain how terrorism and the states that enable it should be dealt with.

Remember, the Pope did not approve of the military action against the Taliban.

Peace, of course, should be the goal of all civilized human beings. Millions of Americans are against a war in Iraq today and millions of us were vehemently opposed to confronting Hitler as well.

Back then the anti-war movement was led by Charles Lindbergh and Ambassador Joseph Kennedy who largely dismissed accusations of Nazi brutality and weapons production as propaganda.

In 1937, SS Chief Henrich Himmler was even on the cover of Time Magazine. I have the issue.

The article criticized Himmler and hinted at barbaric behavior, but there was no "smoking gun."

The failure to confront the obvious evil of the Nazis early, of course, led to the deaths of more than 55 million human beings in Europe. Millions of jews were stunned when they were led by German guards to the gas chambers.

How could human beings do this?

Even after evidence of mass executions surfaced, many the world over refused to believe it. Liberating American soldiers were horrified at what they found in the concentration camps.

Most had no idea of what they were really fighting against.

Does anyone today believe that Al Qaeda or Saddam would not slaughter jews and, indeed, Americans if they had the power to do so?

So what is the difference between a dictator like Saddam and Adolph Hitler?

It continues to astound me that 37% of Americans, according to the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, do not support the removal of Saddam Hussein unless other countries, which do not share our danger, sign on.

I mean, why allow a dictator who has weapons that would make Hitler salivate, remain a threat to the world?

Does it make sense that Cameroon has to sign on before we neutralize this threat?

If France, German, China, and Russia would support the United States against Saddam, he'd already be out of power. If France, Russia, and Britain had marched into Germany in 1933 there would have been no World War or Holocaust.

Nobody can predict the outcome and aftermath of any war. But we can learn from history. Evil has a way of killing people, that's a fact.

And the only way that evil will be stopped, is for just and courageous people to confront it.

Saintaw · « **Reply #33 on:** March 11, 2003, 05:43:17 AM »

[edited: need to take my phosphorus pills on time]

Hortlund · « **Reply #34 on:** March 11, 2003, 05:50:37 AM »

No he is just saying that Saddam is a disticnt and terrible threat to the population of Iraq.

You say BS...does that mean you think he is wrong? That Saddam is good for his people?

Saintaw · « **Reply #35 on:** March 11, 2003, 05:53:20 AM »

[edited: need to take my phosphorus pills on time]

Hortlund · « **Reply #36 on:** March 11, 2003, 05:53:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
I think it is reasonably likely that Iran and NK are pushing hard for nuclear deterant capability because they were listed on the idiotic "Axis of Evil" and are watching the US' unstoppable march to crushing Iraq.

Both Iran and NK may well feel that they need the security of being able to tell the US what to go do with itself, eg. if the US goes after Iran say byebye to Tel Aviv and if the US goes after NK say byebye to Tokyo.

By having the capability to do that they block the US' capabilty to utterly destroy them in a conventional invasion.

LOL what an idiotic statement. Fortunately it is easy to prove it wrong.

If N Korea and Iran were actively working on their nuclear capability before Bush made his axis of evil speech, the logic fails.

And guess what...they were. But thanks for trying.

Hortlund · « **Reply #37 on:** March 11, 2003, 05:55:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Saintaw
I said BS. about Mr X caring about Iraqi poeple. After all, they're only camelsh*t, right ... why should we care ?

Because we are good Christians.

Saintaw · « **Reply #38 on:** March 11, 2003, 06:01:36 AM »

[edited: need to take my phosphorus pills on time]

Hortlund · « **Reply #39 on:** March 11, 2003, 06:06:06 AM »

Yes, but the question begs an answer.

Do you think life for the average Iraqi would be better or not if Saddam was removed/killed/abducted?

Because I think it would...so does Mr X.

For me personally that is not the main reason to go to war against Iraq, it is however one of the positive side effects of such a war. We will be liberating the Iraqis from one of the worst dictators since Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot...

Why do you call BS on that?

straffo · « **Reply #40 on:** March 11, 2003, 06:11:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hortlund
Because we are good Christians.

ROTLFMAO

if you are a good christian I'm the next pope.

-tronski- · « **Reply #41 on:** March 11, 2003, 06:14:27 AM »

Quote

Do you think life for the average Iraqi would be better or not if Saddam was removed/killed/abducted?

I think the average Iraqi was better off before sanctions. And would be again once their lifted.

Tronsky

Hortlund · « **Reply #42 on:** March 11, 2003, 06:16:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by -tronski-
I think the average Iraqi was better off before sanctions. And would be again once their lifted.

The only one who can lift those sanctions is Saddam, quite easily too. DO try to remember why the sanctions are in place.

straffo · « **Reply #43 on:** March 11, 2003, 06:20:46 AM »

You sound like an heretic Tronski !

Beware I'm the next pope

Hortlund · « **Reply #44 on:** March 11, 2003, 06:26:04 AM »

I see you dont want to answer the question either Straffo...howcome?