Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Udie on September 30, 2002, 11:43:45 AM
-
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/iraq.congressmen/
Piece of toejame traitors. If you're goin to criticize that's fine, just don't do it from our enemies capital ok? They augta nuke bagdad now just to get rid of david barnyard....
-
Seems like some of the best allies for Saddam aren't found in the UN, but in the US Congress!!
It's sad the the media promotes these extreme persons as the moderate Dems:(
I for one know that the Dems I speak with don't hold such extreme positions.
-
"I'm speaking for the peace process," McDermott said. Lott is "talking from absolute ignorance of what's going on on the ground. I think he ought to be a little more careful about what he says in a country where we value free speech. Dissent is an American right. Without it, it's not a democracy."
This stuff really galls you guys doesn't it? LOL
Freedom isn't free and sometimes it can even piss you off. Welcome to America.
-
Ironic they are saying this from the middle of the Free Republic of Iraq.
"Mr. Saddam, I disagree with your political views"
*CHOP!*
-
"""""I think he ought to be a little more careful about what he says in a country where we value free speech"""""
HAHAHAHAHA
-
its FREE tv time for the clowns
all geared toward Nov elections
goron, then dashole, then a star is born and now the three stooges
what a bunch of mouth pieces for the dems
-
That's roadkill MT you don't do it from our enemies capital.....
TREASON....
-
Dissenting opinions are one thing. Going to the enemies country and displaying "dissent" in their back yard goes beyond the normal expression of a counter opinion. It is right up there as aiding and abetting the enemy, ala hanoi jane.
The proper forum / and or place for dissenting opinions is in the country of the party who has the differing opinion, not while providing a propaganda oportunity to the enemy.
-
The gap where my tooth used to be, hurts.
-
Originally posted by Udie
That's roadkill MT you don't do it from our enemies capital.....
TREASON....
You need a new dictionary.
"Treason. A breach of allegiance to one's government, usually committed through levying war against such government or by giving aid or comfort to the enemy. The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance; or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power.
Treason consists of two elements: adherence to the enemy, and rendering him aid and comfort."
I've yet to see any definitive Al Quaeda>>Iraq link. What Bush is doing is a stretch at best and underhanded at least. Let the inspections go forward.
dh
-
Horn - is that dissent? In America? In 2002? Barely one year after 911?
Surely, you're a traitorous dog for expressing opinions contrary to the appropriate current affairs viewpoint, as laid down from high. :D
I'm being sarcastic, of course - but it's hard not to form the opinion that America is inhabited by 'raghead' hating, armchair war-mongers, flicking between News services for any glimpse of the 'fireworks'.
I know it's not really like that. I respect greatly those Americans that want to see a rational response, uncoloured by the events of Sept. 11th.
-
Using the bad guy's microphone to criticize Bush's Oil War plan, was definitely bad form, but not treason.
-
Originally posted by Horn
Let the inspections go forward.
dh
no toejame
then when they aren't allowed to "inspect" what then?
"talk" some with the "leaders" of Iraq?
you need a plan "B" ready to go & willing to implement, can't start planning then. that'll be time for action not hand wringing
some of you forget it was Iraq that screwed the pooch first. They interfered with clintons inspectors to the point clinton got tired of hearing about it, took away from his oral office duties, & he pulled the inspectors out instead of standing up to the country which LOST the war and agreed to cease fire terms & then refused to follow them.
Iraq is the baddy here. Not the US as some dems/libs and hollywood heroes would have you believe.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
I know it's not really like that. I respect greatly those Americans that want to see a rational response, uncoloured by the events of Sept. 11th.
psst
there isn't an American response to ANYTHING that isn't "colored" by 9/11
-
psssssst... there's no such thing as a "Clinton inspector"
Look, if we find that Saddam is behind 9-11, or supporting terrorism with the goal of inflicting harm on US, then I say squash him like a bug!
Otherwise lets try to protect what America is all about, and quit trying to become some kind of western Taliban.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Horn - is that dissent? In America? In 2002? Barely one year after 911?
Surely, you're a traitorous dog for expressing opinions contrary to the appropriate current affairs viewpoint, as laid down from high. :D
I'm being sarcastic, of course - but it's hard not to form the opinion that America is inhabited by 'raghead' hating, armchair war-mongers, flicking between News services for any glimpse of the 'fireworks'.
I know it's not really like that. I respect greatly those Americans that want to see a rational response, uncoloured by the events of Sept. 11th.
Yes, I seem to be the one of the few whose life wasn't "changed forever" by those a-holes running planes into buildings--except perhaps to be more watchful and simultaneously more irritated while at airports as they strip search some poor octogenarian.
A horrible tragedy? Yes. Shall we kick some bellybutton back? HELL YES. Have we? I think so. Could it happen again with the new security? Absolutely (think shards of glass, porcelain blades). Is our awareness heightened? Yep, and I think that's a good thing--complacency is not a good habit.
Iraq, however, is a whole different story, and should be treated that way instead of rolled up into the all encompassing "War Against Terrorism"
dh
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
psssssst... there's no such thing as a "Clinton inspector"
Look, if we find that Saddam is behind 9-11, or supporting terrorism with the goal of inflicting harm on US, then I say squash him like a bug!
Otherwise lets try to protect what America is all about, and quit trying to become some kind of western Taliban.
Let's see just this weekend they find weapons grade uranium in Turkey which is right next door to Iraq Come on guys I no you're not stupid are you? Surely you have learned from history? The history of the past 11 years? This has NOTHING to do with 9/11 never did. This was part of the campain in 2000. This has needed to be done since 1991.
Ditto to what Eagler said, but I swear my glass is half empty after this weekend. Why people continue to pander to this murdering maniac I'll never understand. We're going to lose this war at this rate. Say goodbye to NY or LA or DC or Houston or Seatle or London, or all of them. If they were smooth enough to hijack 4 planes at the same time, surely they can set off 4 or more nukes at the same time.
I pray to God that I don't have to say "see I told you so"
-
C'mon Udie!
Houston looks like its already been hit.
;)
-
Originally posted by Eagler
no toejame
then when they aren't allowed to "inspect" what then?
"talk" some with the "leaders" of Iraq?
you need a plan "B" ready to go & willing to implement, can't start planning then. that'll be time for action not hand wringing
some of you forget it was Iraq that screwed the pooch first. They interfered with clintons inspectors to the point clinton got tired of hearing about it, took away from his oral office duties, & he pulled the inspectors out instead of standing up to the country which LOST the war and agreed to cease fire terms & then refused to follow them.
Iraq is the baddy here. Not the US as some dems/libs and hollywood heroes would have you believe.
Iraq is certainly a baddie.
The inspections were to start in 1993 or so. Do you really think that no one was thinking plan "B" back then? Do you really think that it's just been the recent Bush administration that has been saddled with this issue? If we don't have plans C-Z already in print and studied then we should fire our entire intelligence staff!
You could be right, but I thought that the UN actually pulled the inspectors, not Clinton.
dh
-
Bush has said that Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terrorism.
-
Originally posted by Udie
Ditto to what Eagler said, but I swear my glass is half empty after this weekend. Why people continue to pander to this murdering maniac I'll never understand. We're going to lose this war at this rate. Say goodbye to NY or LA or DC or Houston or Seatle or London, or all of them. If they were smooth enough to hijack 4 planes at the same time, surely they can set off 4 or more nukes at the same time.
I pray to God that I don't have to say "see I told you so"
This is what I was reacting to, Thrawn. "We're going to lose this war at this rate."
What war?
dh
-
Remember this guy?
He wanted to avoid war just like our dear Senators in Iraq....
-
Originally posted by Horn
This is what I was reacting to, Thrawn. "We're going to lose this war at this rate."
What war?
dh
Cross communication. I hadn't read your post before I posted mine.
-
Originally posted by Udie
Let's see just this weekend they find weapons grade uranium in Turkey which is right next door to Iraq Come on guys I no you're not stupid are you? Surely you have learned from history? The history of the past 11 years? This has NOTHING to do with 9/11 never did. This was part of the campain in 2000. This has needed to be done since 1991.
Ditto to what Eagler said, but I swear my glass is half empty after this weekend. Why people continue to pander to this murdering maniac I'll never understand. We're going to lose this war at this rate. Say goodbye to NY or LA or DC or Houston or Seatle or London, or all of them. If they were smooth enough to hijack 4 planes at the same time, surely they can set off 4 or more nukes at the same time.
I pray to God that I don't have to say "see I told you so"
Take a deep breath, relax.
The Axis of Terror (Bush/Ashcroft/Rumsfeld) has lowered our DEFCON status from Orange to Soft Teal.
Nothing to worry about big guy.
;)
-
Sure hope that smoking gun isn't pointed at some of you folks. I really do.
-
Massachussets...... :rolleyes:
-
Remember this guy?
He liked to use preemptive strikes to ensure the security of his homeland.
-
Ohh the Bush Hitler comparison again. A treasure... Hey MT are you that ugly lesbian German government official who was recently fired for that same reason?
-
grun I think mt trumped you, throw your wildcard, Stalin.....
-
Boy MT I bet you are going to love the day a nuclear bomb takes out a major US or Israeli city arent you?
-
Just pointing out the idiocy of your little comparison GH. Or did that go over your head?
<----- staunch Lesbian
-
Until and unless the U.S. invades Iraq, Hussein won't have a reason to be lobbing nukes around.
He doesn't need that kind of global attention.
-
Hmmmm! Hanoi Jane must have procreated!
McDermott may be exercising his right to freedom of expression, but it is in very poor taste.
My home town of Dermott, Arkansas was named after a McDermott. I'm so ASHAMED! :o
Shuckins
-
Wait a minute, Grunherz, weren't you the one bringing WW2 leader analogies to the discussion?
Why shouldn't anyone else be allowed to wield that particular weapon?
-
I like lesbians.
-
Sure they can! In fact I was pretty sure one of you USA hating types would do exactly what MT did.
Pretty sad to actually think our president is Adolf Hitler..... My god MT I hope none of your family is exposed to your lunacy...
-
I hope none of MT's family is exposed to your lunacy, Grunherz.
-
How clever, did you think that up all by yourself and so quickly?
-
Some of us here still remember "Hanoi Jane'.
I don't think it would be an overreation to strip that amazinhunk of his office and tar and feather his ass, followed by a ride on a pole all the way back to Iraq.
Last time I checked, there were 'confirmed' reports that that amazinhunk hussein still has possession of one of our pilots from the 1991 war.
Our government has sat on its freakin hands, alternately switching one thumb for annother in it's collective ass. The time is long past due for 'em to get up, and switch from sniffin thumbs to droppin bombs again.
-
Well, when you've got such fine material to work with, anything's possible!
-
I try hard....
So whats next? Who is Dick Cheney, Goebbls? Rumsfeld, Himmler?
Where will it end USA hating degenerates?
Why do you hate this country so much? Why? I can understand why the lunatic militant Muslim fringe hates us but why you - our own fellow citizens and allies? Why? Why?
What kind of deep seeded contempt and hatred is this towards the American nation, our government, our leaders our just cause at this critical time in history. Just after the worst ever massacre and act of intollerance, hatred and murder directed at innocent American civilians ever? Why now? What kind of sick need does it fulfil in you to attack and hate so much now? :(
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
Until and unless the U.S. invades Iraq, Hussein won't have a reason to be lobbing nukes around.
He doesn't need that kind of global attention.
Of course not, he would be stupid to do that. He'll just give it to some terrorist org and let them set it off.
-
Oh I get it... After we've removed Hussein and occupied Iraq for the decades that it will take to put another (more friendly) government in place, the threat of suitcase sized nuclear devices at the Super Bowl will somehow magically be diminished.
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
Last time I checked, there were 'confirmed' reports that that amazinhunk hussein still has possession of one of our pilots from the 1991 war.
Yeah, so are those POWs getting aout of Guantanamo Bay anytime soon? :rolleyes:
-
Udie,
check the news regarding that Urainum.
First it was 16 kg, then it turned out to be like 10 ounces. Then TURKISH POLICE RELEASE the two suspects, who promptly disappear. Police was notified by convinient "tip".
One word: PROVOCATION. I've lived under government that used those, and i can smell one miles away.
Hangtime,
what happend to those reports ? Seems that everyone forgot, doesn't it ?
There were reports of Hussain staging a plot to kill Bish Sr two weeks back. What happend to that ?
All i can see now is a desperate search for a justification to go to war. We coudn't tie them to Al-queda, so we're just hinting at it.
WMD thing seems to be sticking well, but if Iraq allows the inspectors in, Bush & Co are gonna be in deep looking for another excuse. And make no mistake, Hussain will allow them in, just to piss off USA.
Today Rumsfield is being very indignant about Iraq shooting at our planes bombing their targets. Kinda ironic, isn't it ?
We're gonna drop a bomb on you, but please don't shoot back ?
Bush needs this war to keep the patriotism aka "Those who don't agree with me aren't true americans" feelings running high before November elections. If GOP sweeps both houses, we're going to have first unchecked one party rule in ages. And those don't look good, trust me.
Kinda sad how we left Kurds to the wind along with other anti-hussain types in 90s after the Gulf War, isn't it ?
Should have finished a job back then, but again, it wasn't that good for our friend Turkey, was it ?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I try hard....
So whats next? Who is Dick Cheney, Goebbls? Rumsfeld, Himmler?
Where will it end USA hating degenerates?
Why do you hate this country so much? Why? I can understand why the lunatic militant Muslim fringe hates us but why you - our own fellow citizens and allies? Why? Why?
What kind of deep seeded contempt and hatred is this towards the American nation, our government, our leaders our just cause at this critical time in history. Just after the worst ever massacre and act of intollerance, hatred and murder directed at innocent American civilians ever? Why now? What kind of sick need does it fulfil in you to attack and hate so much now? :(
The hatred for America comes from you, not me. It is you who despises all that America stands for, It is you who wishes to end our freedoms and make all within your pervue follow YOUR party line, it is you spewing the bile at those who dare to question authority. Wake up little boy. Your mommy is calling you. She wants you to take a nap so you won't be so cranky anymore.
Amd for the record I support your right to place whatever you want into your signature. It should be accurate though, yours isn't.
-
Originally posted by fd ski
There were reports of Hussain staging a plot to kill Bish Sr two weeks back. What happend to that ?
Bush Sr. tried to kill Sadam with those missles made from cannon barrels.
-
Thanks upon further reflection my signature bit about you was inaccurate it has now been corrected..... Read it again.
Oh and though I found your speech about me trying to take your rights away quite touching it is fundementally untrue. I have no issue with your right to say those terrible things but I do have a personal problem and disagreement with what you said and am openly expressing my free speech rights by challenging and attacking your views. I am not the government and can legaly state and hold (almost) any opinions about your speech. Unless of course you consider disagreeing with a liberal such as yourself unconstitutional.
Go on now MT.....
-
Ah well anyone who has fought GR in his 109 understands this part of his sig.
Imagine there is a nice Bf109G6 picture in this spot!
Hats off to you GR :)
As for the rest of his sig, why would anybody care? People can say whatever they want. Its America, land of the brave and the FREE.
:rolleyes:
-
Thats the attitude senna! But MT was right and my bit about him was at first somewhat misleading but now accurately reflects the facts.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Thats the attitude senna! But MT was right and my bit about him was at first somewhat misleading but now accurately reflects the facts.
For the record, I don't think Dubya is "like" Hitler either, anymore than I think those guys in Bagdad are "like" Neville Chamberlain.
If Hussein tries to annex land like Hitler did, then I say we squash him.
If Hussein attacks a sovereign nation like Hitler did, we squash him again.
If he violates a treaty Like Hitler (building up illegal forces), then we make him comply. Note the difference. If this means war, then please let it be for all the right reasons, and those reasons have not been met as of yet IMHO.
You are absolutely right Grun, you have the right to say whatever you wish. But calling dissent, hatred, is foul and meaningless debate. It is just slinging mud for the sake of slinging. Who told you that disagreement equated to hate? Poor misguided youth.
-
Why is it so difficult for people in this country to support their government?
Why do thse people think that they appear "educated" when they disagree with policies designed for their own good?
Why do these people buy into what the media says when it supports their viewpoint but denounce it when it disagrees?
Why do these people think they are a part of the "enlightened minority" while sitting in their computer chairs?
Those of you that oppose an "intervention" in Iraq for the "usual" reasons are completely unaware of the politics in the region and are only making yourselves look foolish.
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Why is it so difficult for people in this country to support their government?
Why do thse people think that they appear "educated" when they disagree with policies designed for their own good?
Why do these people buy into what the media says when it supports their viewpoint but denounce it when it disagrees?
Why do these people think they are a part of the "enlightened minority" while sitting in their computer chairs?
Those of you that oppose an "intervention" in Iraq for the "usual" reasons are completely unaware of the politics in the region and are only making yourselves look foolish.
Of the people. By the people. For the people.
Get it?
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Why is it so difficult for people in this country to support their government?
Why do thse people think that they appear "educated" when they disagree with policies designed for their own good?
Why do these people buy into what the media says when it supports their viewpoint but denounce it when it disagrees?
Why do these people think they are a part of the "enlightened minority" while sitting in their computer chairs?
Those of you that oppose an "intervention" in Iraq for the "usual" reasons are completely unaware of the politics in the region and are only making yourselves look foolish.
what this guy said
its easy though
"for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction"
ying and yang
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Why is it so difficult for people in this country to support their government?
I'll happily support my Government. Unless they are screwing up. Then it's our job to let them know.
Why do thse people think that they appear "educated" when they disagree with policies designed for their own good?
Can you name a SINGLE policy designed for "your own good"?? Who is to be the judge of what my "own good" is? You? Bush?
Why do these people buy into what the media says when it supports their viewpoint but denounce it when it disagrees?
Who are "these people"? Has the media done something good lately? Aside from broadcasting views of politicians that you disagree with?
Why do these people think they are a part of the "enlightened minority" while sitting in their computer chairs?
In my chair as opposed to standing? :rolleyes:
Those of you that oppose an "intervention" in Iraq for the "usual" reasons are completely unaware of the politics in the region and are only making yourselves look foolish.
I haven't read anything about an "intervention"-- I've been reading about an upcoming WAR. Get it? As to "usual" reasons, I don't know WTF you're talking about. If you're talking about who the US will install as the new puppet in the Iraqi regime, well then yeah, I do have some questions. Foolish? Do some homework.
Tool of the Emperor, indeed.
dh
-
"If Hussein tries to annex land like Hitler did, then I say we squash him.
If Hussein attacks a sovereign nation like Hitler did, we squash him again.
If he violates a treaty Like Hitler (building up illegal forces), then we make him comply. Note the difference. If this means war, then please let it be for all the right reasons, and those reasons have not been met as of yet IMHO. "
MT MT MT MT you naive fool
Hitler did not need to "attack" a soverign nstion till September 1939, before that he was allowed by the weak allies to ILLEGALY and in breach of various treaties:
Create army of over 100,000
Reintroduce conscription
Publicly dump the Versailles treaty
Create an airforce
Remiliterize the Rheinland
Annex austria
Was given the Sudetenland "Peace in our times"
Invade the rest of Czechoslovakia in March 39
So he was allowed at least thse eight major vilotations of major treaties with no seroius reprecussions. This involved the forcible invasion and anexation of two soveriegn countries, Austria and the whole of Czeckoslovakia and he allies failed to act because they were against war. Why didnt they squash him when he invaded the whole remaining czeckoslovakia in March 39? Can you guess why Hitler was less than discouraged when he decided to invade Poland.
How can you be so foolish?
I like your euphamism "illegal forces". Since in the REAL WORLD this means nuclear weapons how exactly do you intend to make him comply when he develops such an "illegal force" ? Even one nuke is catastrophic.
Do you actually think he will just drop his lifelong ambitions of power all of a sudden to let the inspectors and UN discover everything. He is buying time, thats all. He knew the US was serious about attacking and he blinked. Now it's back to his realm of confusing the UN. He just wants time. Its obvious. Time for what? I dont know but based on his track record I dont think it's anything all that good. If the French had acted in 1936 Hitler would have been done yet only a few years later they were overrrun by him in 6 weeks. Now dont be idiotic and say its unrealistic to think Hussain will overrun the USA, of course he wont. The point is timing is crucial in a short time something could develop to drastically change the situation. We must be agressive, we must make it clear we are not afraid to go to war. In fact that is the key with murderous dictators just as is it with schoolyard bullies. Make it clear we are not afraid to fight right now, make it clear he will get a bloody nose in the first second he tries anything. Not doing so only invites and incourages a dictators agression and attention. If we come to him fearful and reluctant then thats how he will see us - fearful and reluctant and hesitant to act or even react. This cannot be allowed. I simply cannot understand how liberal types fail to see this in the past decade, maybe you guys should grow a pair of balls like Kennedy grew during the missle crisis. He openly threatened war and the tryrant backed down. Imagine if we were sendig congressional envoys to moscow who only criticized the US stance....
One last thing:
George W. Bush = Good guy
Saddam Hussein = Bad guy
-
Do you actually think he will just drop his lifelong ambitions of power all of a sudden to let the inspectors and UN discover everything. He is buying time, thats all. He knew the US was serious about attacking and he blinked.
Do you actually think you just made a point?
Unbelievable.
"Illegal forces" was not a euphamism, but one of the violations of treaty that Hitler and Hussein both have been accused of doing. Hitler built an airforce when wasn't supposed to, Hussein built WMD (supposedly). Go look up euphamism in the dictionary tardling (thank you Animal).
Maybe you "conservative types" can try to open your eyes a little and not just follow blindly into the GOP one way street to war.
Kennedy did everything in his power to avoid a military conflict in Cuba. Read your history. He didn't just rattle the saber and yell real loud.
A position of strength is a good thing. Not having to use it is even better.
-
I blew away your whole riducuous argument about treating him like Hitler was treated. You seem to have forgotton what happends when a dictator is allowed the Hitler Treatment.....
And to think you accuse me of ignoring and glossing contradictory arguments.
PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTION!
Do you have faith in Saddam Hussein to stop his WMD projects and comply with treaties?
YES or NO
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Do you have faith in Saddam Hussein to stop his WMD projects and comply with treaties?
YES or NO
Do you know that Saddam Hussein has any active WMD projects?
YES or NO
and
HOW DO YOU KNOW?
-
YES
Because he kicked out the inspectors and enthusiastically impeded their actions for 6 years while they were there. Thats enough for me to believe he is hiding his ongoing WMD projects.
Now that I have answered your question stop changing the subject and let MT answer my question.
-
It is bad practice to negotiate from weakness. Unless you opponent is very stupid, you will come up with the short stick.
Despots understand raw, naked power. The more immenent the threat, the stronger your negotiated position.
Unless Saddam believes that he is in immediate personal danger, he will squirm and weasel his way to what he wants.
Our representatives in Baghdad weaken our position, just when we want it to be the strongest.
They are not Chamberlain, the are closer to... remember this squeak? If not, ask a Vietnam vet, or better, a POW
-
before that he was allowed by the weak allies
It's seems you need to make a trip to Europe just to see our "monument aux morts"
You will understand quickly why the allied made all it was possible to avoid war.
-
I understand that Straffo. I've been to many of the WW1 battlefields, and several of the cemeteries as part of a school trip as a kid - depressing places. There's no wonder the European nations chose appeasement over conflict. The last post signalled at the Menin Gate every night, is particularly moving.
There's no glory in war, a sentiment summed up as succinctly as you'll ever find in the poem 'Dulce et Decorum est Pro Patria Mori'.
-
Straffo thats why we must learn from mistakes in the past. The allies were clearly unwilling to risk war in the time before WW2 - they acted this way towards Hitler and thats what he saw. He thought he would be allowed to act with impunity because there were no consequences. Every time he violated a treaty or ivaded a country there was merely a whimper from Paris or London. Finally he went too far and invaded a third country Poland and then, finally the French and British got their war. Unfortunately our poland in this case might be nucler weapon detonation in Tel Aviv or a major US city. I am not comfortable with risking that or the consequences of this being let go that far, we must act strong now and stop this.
-
I agree I just wanted to point one of the reasons why war was not a popular option at this time.
Should have the allied make an intervention in 1936 perhaps it should have been better but no one will ever know for sure
Currently lot of people (I mean those not in the military) look at war as a good option agains Iraq because since the Gulfwar war look like an arcade game.
But even if it will cost less lives than a conventional war lot of lifes will be wasted.
-
"But even if it will cost less lives than a conventional war lot of lifes will be wasted."
Well some 40 million allied military and innocent allied civilians lives were wasted trying to stop Hitler and the Japanese after they were allowed to go behave with impunity for almost a decade and went into full war believing they would not be challenged for fear of people dying in a war.
I dont want Saddam to have these weapons and go into full mode thinking this, he must be stopped hard, stopped hard now and not after it's too late.
-
GRUN, Your ability to comprehend what you read is frightening! When exactly did I say we should treat Saddam like Hitler? I believe I said just the opposite. I think that if you would take your head out of Trent Lott's prettythang for a moment and read what I wrote you will find that I call for NOT conceding to Saddam like we did to Hitler. Go back and read!
And BTW, what I wrote yesterday hasn't changed, because unlike you I haven't gone back and edited my post to make my point sound better. Weak watermelon GH.
And I think I should get bonus points for getting my name into a permanent signature. Not even the great Elfenwolf has accomplished that feat.
-
and exactly how many times did Iraq fire on OUR FREAKIN AIRFORCE while these traitorous congressmen were in bagdad?
This is roadkill, you libs are so effing wrong on this it's pittiful. HE HAD WMD IN THE 80'S, HE USED THEM ON HIS OWN PEOPLE IN 91. HE HAD THEM WHEN THE INSPECTORS WERE THERE. What makes ANYBODY think that he got rid of them?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Jesus H. Christ, are you people educated in history? Do you have ANY common sense at all? There is ONE way to deal with dictators. RAW BRUTE FORCE, history has proved that again and again. How many people have to DIE because of the democratic party? Iraq's and Americans.
For God's sake these people are waiting to be liberated from a tyrant and have been for DECADES. This man has thwarted EVERY effort to make sure he obides by the cease fire agreement at the end of the Kuwaiti war, for eleven years. And we have to debate why to attack?!?!?!?!?! WTF is the matter with you people?
Come November hopefully it won't matter and Saddam will pay his debt........
Though no doubt it will be Bush's fault when saddam lights his oil wells on fire....again.......
What a bunch of stupid idiots the democrats are, either that or LIARS willing to do anything for power, or worse and most likely both.......
makes me want to vomit......
-
Sounds like you're feeling better Udie :)
-
Yes I edited the signature. I added the word "like" - this makes it accurate. So there, I guess you cant read or comprehend just like you say I cant...
The first one said: AH player midnight Target actually believes George W. Bush is Adolf Hitler
The revised one: AH player midnight Taget actually believes George W. Bush is like Adolf Hitler
Which is 100% true because you posted the Bush comparsion and portrait of Hitler. You posted the opinion that Bush was like Hiler, as in comporable in his acts and behaviors.
And you did ask that Saddam be treated like Hitler:
"If Hussein tries to annex land like Hitler did, then I say we squash him.
If Hussein attacks a sovereign nation like Hitler did, we squash him again.
If he violates a treaty Like Hitler (building up illegal forces), then we make him comply. Note the difference. If this means war, then please let it be for all the right reasons, and those reasons have not been met as of yet IMHO."
If Hussein does as Hitler then we should treat him like hitler. This is exactly what you said. Of course I'm not a liberal of fine superior intelllect like you but you certainly say we should treat him like we treated hitler. And that was a disaster. And I show you how we disnt "squasH" Hitler when he invaded and annexed TWO severeign nations - Austria and the whole of Czeckoslovakia.
I find it sad and disturbing that you are proud of being publicly qouted as having likened Pesident Bush to Adlof Hitler. Seek help MT, your paranoid delusions and hatred of those with different ideas have gone to your head. So thats why I put you in the signature, your madness must be brought to light. You actually likened the US president to Hitler, that is madness!!! :(
-
If you are a proponent of peace, then you are a proponent of war.
Without war, you can not get those that oppose peace out of the way.
Unless of course you think maniacal tyrants can be talked into having a change of heart..
The peace accord, or whatever it's called, for Iraq has been repeatedly violated since it's inception.
Hussein is closer to Hitler than many realise... all it'll take is for him to invade and destroy his neighboring countries 5 years down the road for those same people to say, "We should of taken him out 5 years ago."
By then, it'll be too late.
-SW
-
OK, one more time for the "Learning Disabled".
If Saddam acts like Hitler we should squash him! Now read slowly so this sinks in. The "him" in that sentence is Hussien.... get it? Should I repeat it again? Now go back to class and try to ignore the commie liberal USA haters that are obviously making you neglect your studies.
The editing I refered to was not your signature, but you knew that. It was an entire section you added after I had replied to you.
-
He has acted like Hitler, hes broken his Versailes treaty numerous times. Squash?
Which post are you talking about MT?
-
You wanna wait for him to invade....
AGAIN MT?
I dunno if that "Learning Disabled" jab was at me, but I am not...
-SW
-
No SW I'm learning diabled.. Uuuuhuuhhhuhhhh :rolleyes:
-
Squash?.... go back and read.
this was added after I had responded:
MT MT MT MT you naive fool
Hitler did not need to "attack" a soverign nstion till September 1939, before that he was allowed by the weak allies to ILLEGALY and in breach of various treaties:
Create army of over 100,000
Reintroduce conscription
Publicly dump the Versailles treaty
Create an airforce
Remiliterize the Rheinland
Annex austria
Was given the Sudetenland "Peace in our times"
Invade the rest of Czechoslovakia in March 39
So he was allowed at least thse eight major vilotations of major treaties with no seroius reprecussions. This involved the forcible invasion and anexation of two soveriegn countries, Austria and the whole of Czeckoslovakia and he allies failed to act because they were against war. Why didnt they squash him when he invaded the whole remaining czeckoslovakia in March 39? Can you guess why Hitler was less than discouraged when he decided to invade Poland.
How can you be so foolish?
Ring a bell?
-
After which one of your posts?
-
I'll save you guys some time and effort, fellas, and post the next three threads for you! Just insert the appropriate names...
Shuckins
-
OH YEAH!
-
SEZ YOU!
-
WELL, YOU'RE ANOTHER!
-
C'mon MT tell me and everyone else after which one of your posts I supposedly edited the post you say?
-
Originally posted by Udie
This is roadkill, you libs are so effing wrong on this it's pittiful. HE HAD WMD IN THE 80'S, HE USED THEM ON HIS OWN PEOPLE IN 91.
Jesus H. Christ, are you people educated in history? Do you have ANY common sense at all?
Didn't the US us nukes to test the ability of thier soldiers to deal with radiation?
e people are waiting to be liberated from a tyrant and have been for DECADES.
I suppose the US is about to invade Turkey to liberate the Kurds there as well.
Cripes, what hippocracy.
-
Sheesh, were you sitting at your computer just waiting for me to reply?
It was the one where I quoted a section from the post you edited. duh. The post right after yours. duh.
-
Tis a very sad time for Democrats after this last couple of weeks!!!! And there really isn't a Good dem spokes person left
to stand up to the plate...
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Do you actually think you just made a point?
Unbelievable.
"Illegal forces" was not a euphamism, but one of the violations of treaty that Hitler and Hussein both have been accused of doing. Hitler built an airforce when wasn't supposed to, Hussein built WMD (supposedly). Go look up euphamism in the dictionary tardling (thank you Animal).
Maybe you "conservative types" can try to open your eyes a little and not just follow blindly into the GOP one way street to war.
Kennedy did everything in his power to avoid a military conflict in Cuba. Read your history. He didn't just rattle the saber and yell real loud.
A position of strength is a good thing. Not having to use it is even better.
Is it this post MT?
-
I stand corrected Grunherz, Your edit was at 9:41 while my post is at 9:43. You were probably posting your edit while I was typing my response to your original post. My bad.
-
Thanks MT, I was slowly getting to that point. Apology accepted. :D
OK next round is up communist degenerate savage. ;)
-
Thats MR. Communist degenerate savage to you!
Now concede that I did not say we should treat Saddam like we treated Hitler and we will be even.
-
I can only go by what you posted MT, and to me it looked like that. It's not a matter of being even and it's certainly not like I owed you anything except perhaps a thanks for admitting and owning up to your obvious mistake.
Even if I were to concede anything in a spirit of cooperation and good feeling it still wouldnt change the fact that you and your compatriots here are advocating a dangerous and historically incorrect approach towards a dictator such as Hussein.
I just read on CNN.com that the Iraqis have yet again agreed to let inspectors back and that the so called presidential sites are still off limits in the current agreement. Invoking your earlier Hitler analogy it would be like him allowing the enforcement of Versailles treaty obligations, like the 100,000 man army or the prohibition of an airforce, only if the pre-war allies agreed in limiting their troop counting and plane spotting to a few German states. It is simply unworkable and a joke. By all accounts these presidental sites are enclosed mini cities and nothing like the relatively small White House compound - in other words more than large enough to enclose hidden WMD labs and manufacturing centers.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Even if I were to concede anything in a spirit of cooperation and good feeling it still wouldnt change the fact that you and your compatriots here are advocating a dangerous and historically incorrect approach towards a dictator such as Hussein.
Back the bus up....
Dangerous and historically incorrect? Puhleeeese. When in history has one organization (UN) conducted continuous, daily over-flights of a "defeated" country? Have you noticed how much of Iraq is overflown?
Dangerous is the spewage of folks like oodie acting on incomplete info--like there WAS NO WEAPONS GRADE URANIUM found? Dangerous is a leader of a superpower who "doesn't know what else to do" -- but by Cod he's going to do it regardless of what Congress, the UN or our allies think. Yeah, brilliant.
...and who would YOU put into power once Saddam is deposed? Names? We did so well with that in Iran (remember the Shah?)--we did so well, an extremist government took control after deposing our (the US's) puppet.
dh
(oh and by the way, been voting Republican my whole adult life. Paint somebody else with your broad brush.)
-
I have a really tough time (read impossible) defending a country/leader who's whole purpose in life is to destroy the United States.
In addition, how can we just 'turn the other cheek' as Iraq continues to fire shots at American pilots on a daily basis?
I'm all for fariness but this has gone too far IMO.
We blasted the hell out of Iraq in the Gulf war, backed off when 'popular world opinion' said we should... and he's still a menace and obviously doesn't abide by his 'word'.
How can we believe that this situation can be resolved by tact and diplomacy when it hasn't worked in the past ?
:confused:
-
I wasnt informed when appeasement became less dangerous. Thanks for the notice. :rolleyes:
Guess what. I dont vote at all, prolly never will because it's pointless to me and I couldn't care which party is in office or who you vote for. The only thing I care about are the actual policies. So if you personally think we should appease Hussein and go soft on him then so be it. Go paint some nice peaceful watercolors with that brush, you can have bad ideas no matter which party you vote for.
And actually this particular argument has little to do with party lines anyway, even congressional democrats are upset at the two idiot representatives in Iraq... What they are doing is shameful, I hope they loose their seats soon. But I bet the Iraqi government propaganda ministry will arrange a nice pension for them.
Basically I disagree with you horn, and for some reason I'm trying hard to be civil and not insult you.
-
Hey I just noticed I have passed 3000 posts!!! :D
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I can only go by what you posted MT, and to me it looked like that. .
I wrote the following re Hitler & Sadam:
If Hussein tries to annex land like Hitler did, then I say we squash him.
If Hussein attacks a sovereign nation like Hitler did, we squash him again.
If he violates a treaty Like Hitler (building up illegal forces), then we make him comply. Note the difference. If this means war, then please let it be for all the right reasons, and those reasons have not been met as of yet IMHO.
or this:
Look, if we find that Saddam is behind 9-11, or supporting terrorism with the goal of inflicting harm on US, then I say squash him like a bug!
Otherwise lets try to protect what America is all about, and quit trying to become some kind of western Taliban.
Then GRUNHERZ wrote:
I blew away your whole riducuous argument about treating him like Hitler was treated.
After which i wrote:
....snip... read what I wrote you will find that I call for NOT conceding to Saddam like we did to Hitler. Go back and read!
and I wrote:
OK, one more time for the "Learning Disabled".
If Saddam acts like Hitler we should squash him! Now read slowly so this sinks in. The "him" in that sentence is Hussien.... get it?
Can I help any further?
-
Let me put it this way MT.
Your Hussein/Hitler comparison:
"If Hussein tries to annex land like Hitler did, then I say we squash him."
My problem with your argument of treating him like Hitler, as modification of your original comparsion:
If Hussein blows up Tel Aviv like Hitler invaded Poland, then I say we squash him.
Do you get it now?
-
how is blowing up tel-aviv like invading poland exactly?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Guess what. I dont vote at all, prolly never will because it's pointless to me and I couldn't care which party is in office or who you vote for. The only thing I care about are the actual policies. So if you personally think we should appease Hussein and go soft on him then so be it. Go paint some nice peaceful watercolors with that brush, you can have bad ideas no matter which party you vote for.
And actually this particular argument has little to do with party lines anyway, even congressional democrats are upset at the two idiot representatives in Iraq... What they are doing is shameful, I hope they loose their seats soon. But I bet the Iraqi government propaganda ministry will arrange a nice pension for them.
Basically I disagree with you horn, and for some reason I'm trying hard to be civil and not insult you.
And I appreciate it. Especially since I erred in responding to both you and oodie in one post. You never were party oriented in your posts. Oodie was. My bad.
What those reps did over there was shameful. Not traitorous.
Having said that, I've never mentioned anywhere admitting or encouraging being "soft" or appeasing Saddam. Rather, I'm of the "let's give this full and measured thought" tribe. As I brought up before--with whom would you replace Saddam? We absolutely have a huge, sucky reputation when it comes to replacing a rogue leader with someone we like.
Let's gather the rest of the world into one big g-damn hammer and smash the twit. Together. As one loose-jointed entity. Not as a lone alpha wolf.
Pres. Bush has apparently placed his judgement above all his allies. Bottom Line? I don't want just our boys coming back in bags--let the world share in the responsibility.
dh
-
bounder:
Would we all agree that even the staunchest reasonable western proponents of peace in dealing with Iraq's dictator would shift their position if Hussein blew up Tel Aviv with a nuclear weapon?
Its the final act of agression and that even the peace crowd cannot excuse away in their effort to avoid war and continue the appeasement. For Hitler's time his invasion of Poland, now we might see it as a mushroom cloud over Tel Aviv.
And since the USA's main issue with Saddam is his illegal development possesion of nuclear weapons its clearly an exact parallel to pre-war Europe's main concern with Hitler, his desire for a Greater German Reich - which naturally meant expansion into and conquest of other nations like Austria, Czecokslovakia, Poland, and in the long term most importantly the Soviet Union. He was allowed to swallow up Austria and all of Czecoslovakia without major challenge, in fact we all know he was directly aided in Munich 1938 by war fearing appeasing pre-war allies in taking the first part of Czecoslovakia. Hussein's expansion is focused on acquiering WMD capabilties and each time the world community gives into him is a direct parallel to allowing Hitler to expand the borders of Germany or violate the Versailles treaty.
So in this case the invasion Poland and a possible nuclear attack on Tel Aviv are exactly analougus to each other in a comparison of Hussein and Hitler.
-
horn:
Many of our common allies and others in the world community are afraid plus they know there is pretty much zero chance of a major terrorist nuclear attack on their soil because frankly they dont play a big or strong enough part in the world to really get in the way of such people and piss them off bad enough as the USA so often does. France and Germany are practically Al Qaeda Europe headquarters with their permissive immigration and political structures especialy towards radicals and extremists. Lets look at the big 5 of permenant security council and also Germany, another important country. The German Chancellor Schroder resorted to saving his carrer by whoring himself out to the anti-USA fringe. So should we count on or even want his support? France has a strange relationship with Iraq. Russia wants it's money back. China is currently equiping the Iraqi air defence system. The UK has expressed support and the US government stance is clear.
So where are we now? This is a time to be decisive and strong. Nobody pretends to know everything and thats exactly how it is during every critical moment of history. By early 1939 every reasonable person knew Hitler was up to no good, everyone know he was a conqueror and subjegator of nations. But why did they not act? They were afraid to face the reality and could only face it when Poland was attacked. As I stated before the poland for our generation of doubters, appeasers and naive peace at all cost adovocates could very well be a mushroom cloud over a major city. That is my concern. Then it will be too late.
-
Originally posted by Horn
Tool of the Emperor, indeed.
dh
And all of the above stated...
My job is doing "homework" in this region of the world. As a result of this I have learned the following things from my overseas colleagues:
1. Americans are confusing themselves. Im beginning to doubt if anyone really understands what this country stands for.
2. The rest of the world thinks we are stupid and is wondering what we are waiting for in terms of the Iraq issue.
3. Almost every country in the Middle East and Northern Africa will welcome and is waiting anxiously for a US invasion of Iraq. No one over there likes Saddam very much. Do many people in this country know that? No. Why? Because they are more concerned with "spanking" and whether or not this issue is being "politicized." The only people that hate Bin Laden and Saddam more than Americans are Muslims. Bin Laden has made life difficult for Muslims in every country and Saddam's idea of control is murdering Muslim scholars and gasing his own people.
Now sir, these are the facts. Based on your desciption quoted above Im guessing you are quick to judge a book by its cover. If you care to retort, be sure to quote something from Fox "News First" as Im sure even that will have more validity than most of the "opinionated" banter in this thread.
Homework indeed...
-
Can you quote any source material for any of those statements. After all that homework you must have tons.
PS: Herbert was a hack. I got tired of the series after Pocket Weazels of Dune. ;)
PPS: We once had a "mau'dib" on this bored.
-
Isn't there country song called "Hello Wall".
"Hello Grun"
:rolleyes:
-
OK......
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
My job is doing "homework" in this region of the world. As a result of this I have learned the following things from my overseas colleagues:
1. Americans are confusing themselves. Im beginning to doubt if anyone really understands what this country stands for.
This is a fact? I'm not confused and I am an American. I know what this country stands for.
2. The rest of the world thinks we are stupid and is wondering what we are waiting for in terms of the Iraq issue.
This is a fact? The rest of the world is waiting for us to take this guy out? Really? ...and they all think we're stupid? Links/Sources, please.
3. Almost every country in the Middle East and Northern Africa will welcome and is waiting anxiously for a US invasion of Iraq.
Northern Africa? Like Col. Khadaffi's country? Welcome us? Waiting anxiously? Doubt it.
No one over there likes Saddam very much. Do many people in this country know that? No. Why? Because they are more concerned with "spanking" and whether or not this issue is being "politicized."
Wow, something I can agree with. I don't like him very much either. As to spanking and politicization, well--in the real world EVERYTHING is politicized. EVERYTHING.
The only people that hate Bin Laden and Saddam more than Americans are Muslims. Bin Laden has made life difficult for Muslims in every country and Saddam's idea of control is murdering Muslim scholars and gasing his own people.
Facts? Sounds awfully subjective to me--"All Muslims hate Bin Laden (how did he get in here?) and Saddam" is a rather sweeping generalization. Sources please.
Now sir, these are the facts. Based on your desciption quoted above Im guessing you are quick to judge a book by its cover. If you care to retort, be sure to quote something from Fox "News First" as Im sure even that will have more validity than most of the "opinionated" banter in this thread.
Sorry didn't even see one fact except perhaps the gassing of the Northern Kurds, which did happen. And a word or two about the quote "Tool of the Empire" -- it is a play on words with your incorrectly spelled BBS handle. The Sardauker were the universally feared army of the Emperors in the novel Dune. The term "Tool of the Empire" actually is a reference to the storm troopers in Star Wars. I used it referring to you becuase you seem to be able only to parrot the stance of the current administration.
Homework indeed...
I give you a "D"......
dh
-
Ill respond out of courtosy only, as arguing with people like you turns out to be less productive than trying to discuss evolution with a Christian fanatic.
My "sources" are experience. Nothing media based. Of the many, many, MANY people I am in contact with in that region of the world, the above stated information holds true. If you believe that anyone in the middle east would have a problem with us ousting the current government in Iraq then you watch too much television, and Ill leave it at that.
If you wish to discuss this with me further you can feel free to send me an Email, but Im already regretting getting involved in this thread in an attempt to teach those who do not want to be taught.
As for my handle, I would have spelled it correctly, sir, except for it seems someone already has thast name registered. :rolleyes: