Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: midnight Target on November 11, 2002, 10:50:00 AM
-
What the heck are we waiting for?
Really! Why wait? We are bad mofo's when it comes to military power, and have had no problem in the past doing what needs to be done. If Saddam is really that bad, we ought to be squashing him now! Right?
-
Willie....er, Saddam is not quite as dangerous as he was just before the elections. I'm guessing he will become real dangerous again in the summer of '04.
-
Do you guys watch the news on the weekend? Just wondering, because if you had you'd know that Bush hasn't stopped talking about saddam.
I know it's hard for you libs to comprehend what I'm about to say, but I'll say it anyway :D I know that you guys are used to being lied to durring a campain and that you are used to your elected leaders doing things diferently than they said they would durring their campains. See on our side of the isle we actually expect our leaders to do what they said they would do durring the campain. So this is what Bush has been doing the last week. So I think this may be causing you some confusion MT. But don't worry, everything is good.
Who knows Bush may even be smart enough to figure out a way to do this without actually goin to war. Oh wait, no he's too stupid for that. How could I be so nieve....
:rolleyes:
-
OK Udie, but ....
doesn't really answer the question. What are we waiting for?
-
Really now... I remember Bush going on and on about nation building and how he would put a stop to it.
We're building one in Afghanistan and if Saddam is gone, we'll be building one there also.
-
what we're waiting for:
public opinion (damned libs)
-
I know what we are waiting for....
All will be come evident in time.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
OK Udie, but ....
doesn't really answer the question. What are we waiing for?
To see if there's a way to do it with out going to war?
Do you think Bush really wants a war? Do you think Republicans or Conservatives want a war? Do you honestly think that? Do you want this war? any war? Do you think that because we suppport the military that we automaticly want war? Seriously is that what you believe about conservatives?
-
Originally posted by Udie
Do you think Bush really wants a war?
Yes.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
doesn't really answer the question. What are we waiing for?
Due process as required by international law and insisted upon by our allies and many on these forums.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
public opinion (damned libs)
If Bush is waiting on public opinion, he's going about it all wrong. :) Support for a military conflict with Iraq has consistently eroded over the last four months, from a high of about 75-80% supporting it to only 55% in the last poll I checked just before the election.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
...and I would add that entertaining the possibility that a multi-national coalition could be built first isn't a bad reason to wait a little longer. And really, isn't the issue one of UN resolution compliance post Gulf War? If Saddam chooses to follow the resolutions, no war. He slips up, war. He's given every opportunity possible, no country can legitimately object.
-
Midnight,
I believe DMF and Keiren answered your question.....
Or did you really want an answer?
Cobra
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
Yes.
Dude, you're blinded by hate I think....
-
Originally posted by Udie
Dude, you're blinded by hate I think....
I'm not the one itching to kill people.
-
Because it would be a slaughter,,,, and that don't play good in the press.
-
Originally posted by Cobra
Midnight,
I believe DMF and Keiren answered your question.....
Or did you really want an answer?
Cobra
I think they are good answers too Cobra, but morally bankrupt.
For instance, if we had the power and the knowledge to stop Hitler prior to WW2, why wait for public opinion or allies to agree with us? Once again, if Saddam is the person painted by the Bush administration as dangerous and sadistic then what are we waiting for? If on the other hand, he is just another bad guy to be dealt with in the court of public opinion then why the hyperbole?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
OK Udie, but ....
doesn't really answer the question. What are we waiing for?
The end of the Moslem hollidays "Ramadan" or whatever its called. Bad PR to start a war against a moslem country in the middle of their hollidays...its not cricket apparently.
After ramadan, Christmas. Although this is less certain. There could be enormous PR advantages of having a war over Christmas.
Reporter-
"This is Wolf Blitzer from an undisclosed location in southern Iraq. Here at the front our brave troops celebrate Christmas."
Cut to pictures of US soldiers in the desert with a small plastic Christmas tree and hundreds of thousands of small packages labeled "To any US service member" sent in from various US citizens. Camera pans to the right where 3 US Soldiers in Desert camo are standing beside a machine gun.
Reporter-
"How does it feel to celebrate Christmas thousands of miles from home?"
US Soldier-
"We are here to get the Job done, and we are doing this so all of you at home can celebrate Christmas in peace."
US soldier nr 2-
"Let me just say hi to my girlfriend back home. Hi Shelia, I love you baby, be good now."
US Soldier nr 3-
"Hi mom."
Reporter-
"I think I speak for all Americans when I say God bless you all, and God bless our wonderful nation."
Cut to picture of American flag waving over the desert. Camera pans to the right and zoom in on two F-16 fighters taking off.
Reporter-
"Two F-16 Falcons are taking off to strike at an Iraqi troop concentration south of Baghdad. While it may be Christmas back home, for the guys in 336th tactical fighter wing, it is just another day of war. This is Wolf Blitzer for CNN."
Yeah, my bet is that war is coming before Christmas eve. There is some excellent PR points to score.
-
We are waiting to see the Iraqi response to the new "tough" resolution that France and Russia okayed. Bush isn't stupid enough to not get the support of the surrounding Arab nations as well.
Then there will be about 4 or 5 months of Sadaam playing "Cat and Mouse" with the inspectors when they arrive in Iraq.
Then, when even the Security Council finally wises up and realises that Sadaam is not going to comply the shooting will start.
Patience MT....patience. ;)
-
actualy i did read news paper few days ago...
something about ... americans are interesting in buying Iraks oil... because Europians already do ...
muihehehehe i say that all the time .. money are No.1 guys, not terrorist :D
-
I see it this way, MT... jumping in too soon, especially when so close to multi-national support, runs the risk of creating more problems down the road. Osama bin Laden is a byproduct of the first Gulf War, no?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
What the heck are we waiting for?
Really! Why wait? We are bad mofo's when it comes to military power, and have had no problem in the past doing what needs to be done. If Saddam is really that bad, we ought to be squashing him now! Right?
Why risk all those lives and spend all that money when we can just bluff him into complying by acting tough? And what better time to bluff than after we have been pissed off by an attack on our soil and crushed the government and terrorist organization responsible for those attacks?
-
Kieran
official reason to create Al quaida was to force Americans army leave ME.... and they did many attacks agains military targets in the pass..... but they did ignore them....
and because normal american attitude is to be an "arogant,ignorant" i guess it will take some time untill they will start to think about them self
-
What makes him so dangerous? Oh yeah, all those nasty gasses, germs, radioactive materials and willingness to use them whenever it's convenient.
How about if he's willing to let us see for ourselves that he doesn't have any as he says he doesn't then we leave him alone. But if he's lying and not willing to abide by the terms of his surrender back in '91 then we just go in and finish the job.
All in due time. What's yer rush?
-
I don't know which is sillier, TahGut contradicting his views for the sake of a troll, or so many people striking on it :)
-Sikboy
PS: TahGut, send me an email
-
Nothing was going to happen prior to October due to the fiscal cycle. Most units go pretty broke in September... and the new fiscal year starts in October. Traditionally, I think you'd find most occurances starting in the November/December/January time frame.
Its entirely possible that things aren't nearly as complex as some would make them out to be.
AKDejaVu
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
I don't know which is sillier, TahGut contradicting his views for the sake of a troll, or so many people striking on it :)
Hence my mentioning that the due process route was advocated by people on this forum. :)
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Remember Midnight,,, the greatest victory is the battle you never have to fight.
-
when we can just bluff him into complying by acting tough
If you think Bush is bluffing, you may be in for one heck of a big surprise. He is not bluffing, he will order an attack if all else fails to guarantee that Saddam Hussien offers no danger to the USA through development of weapons of mass destruction.
I dont think Bush, or most people fear Hussein sending a plane or missle at us with a bomb aboard, but I think most realize he could easily supply terrorists with the weapons they could use to cause mass destruction and death. (biological, chemical, nuclear)
I realize I risk being called an alarmist, or a gullible follower for accepting that there are people out there like Hussein that wish to do us harm. You might choose to believe that this kind of attack on us won't happen. Feel free to believe that if you choose.
But...
I remember September 11, 2001.
dago
-
I think we should bluff him into showing his face and kill him. it would solve the problem for good.
comrradII
-
the inspectors remember, its the inspectors turn. The US and now the rest of the world are waiting on bighead saddams answer to the UN latest.
I think saddam was hopin it was only an election threat :)
-
The real question is, who's next? There are any number of countries that pose as big a threat, if not a bigger threat to our future national security. The whole Axis of Evil thing.
North Korea, for example, already has weapons of mass destruction and serious domestic issues creating instability. Hey, didn't they once invade a neighbor, kidnap foreign nationals, kill American servicemen regularly in small quantities since the treaty, capture an American naval vessel, attack South Korean naval forces on a regular basis, attempt to infiltrate action groups using tunnels and mini-submarines, conduct aggressive and intimidating missile tests, disregard international treaties, etc.?
PRC, well, what's going to happen with Taiwan in the next decade? China can already incinerate millions of Americans at the push of a button.
Iran? They could be coming around though, somewhat, if the moderates don't get destabilized.
Pakistan, there is already an Islamic bomb and the potential for it to get in the wrong hands rather easily, given a successful overthrow. In fact, there is a strong Taliban 2 atmosphere in some areas.
Saudi Arabia? More of an international terrorist threat than Iraq, at least where 9-11 was concerned.
So, if this is an honest moral exercise, as opposed to some alternative motivation related to sweet Iraqi crude or a personal grudge, than we must continue to act until all these equal or greater threats are eliminated.
Charon
-
because normal american attitude is to be an "arogant,ignorant"
Oh, goodie. Can I rebut with an ad hominem attack on Russians? :rolleyes:
-
and then their "parliment" <- whatever that really is in Iraq- votes "NO" to the world wide approved UN res and weapon inspectors...
think bighead will go along with them or try to look like a global "hero" going against the "wishes" of his own ppl in the "name of peace" :rolleyes:
-
I heard this morning on the news IB to work that Iraq basically told the UN to go screw itself regarding the resolution on unrestricted inspections....
Its coming... :( Unfortunately it needs to be done I think....
-
The Iraqi parliment voted NO, now it is up to Saddam. The parliment certainly voted as instructed by Saddam. My guess is that this is just political theater, and the outcome isn't certain. Saddam may intend to show his "magnanimous good will" by overruling his parliment, or he may claim that he has no option but to follow the will of his people.
It ain't over 'til it's over.
-
Originally posted by Kieran
Osama bin Laden is a byproduct of the first Gulf War, no?
Keiran,
I think Osama bin Laden was/is a waste product of the US support for the Afghan mujahedin (sp?) from their war against the former pro-Soviet gov't of Afghanistan and the Soviet Union.
-
Agreed, but his anger at the west is supposedly spurred on by the way the US handled itself in the Gulf War.
-
The whole middle east needs a good kick in the prettythang. Iraq is a good way of doing it and making the others think twice.
-
Originally posted by Kieran
Agreed, but his anger at the west is supposedly spurred on by the way the US handled itself in the Gulf War.
problem was the admin that was suppose to watch him was too busy chasin fat chicks while cutting the budgets of those whose job it was to keep tabs on OBL & the like. I think we dropped the ball by not puttin him down when his rabies first surfaced. But hey, 93 -00 the US had no enemies, everyone loved us and our pres was trying to give that "love" back in return :rolleyes:
-
Take the blinkers off, for at least 5 minutes. Which administration trained and armed that particular nutcase? And when you've answered that, which particular adminitration trained and armed the forces of current enemy-of-the-moment, Saddam Hussein?
Hindsight is a great tool, but you've got to use it across the board.
Hint: it's not Clinton or any other Democrat.
-
Originally posted by Eaglecz
Kieran
official reason to create Al quaida was to force Americans army leave ME.... and they did many attacks agains military targets in the pass..... but they did ignore them....
and because normal american attitude is to be an "arogant,ignorant" i guess it will take some time untill they will start to think about them self
Bait is too stinky, obvious. Try a double hook jig set up, take the Power Bait off, wash your hands before tying it off on your line, then try again.
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
Take the blinkers off, for at least 5 minutes. Which administration trained and armed that particular nutcase? And when you've answered that, which particular adminitration trained and armed the forces of current enemy-of-the-moment, Saddam Hussein?
Hindsight is a great tool, but you've got to use it across the board.
Hint: it's not Clinton or any other Democrat.
USSR was our friend in WW2, we armed them...
So whats your point again?
Yes, Gov'ts change, so do priorities and leaders.
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
Take the blinkers off, for at least 5 minutes. Which administration trained and armed that particular nutcase? And when you've answered that, which particular adminitration trained and armed the forces of current enemy-of-the-moment, Saddam Hussein?
Hindsight is a great tool, but you've got to use it across the board.
Hint: it's not Clinton or any other Democrat.
Baaa.... they where our tool vrs the Soviet Union. We were in a "Cold War" at that time remember?
As far as Sadem is concerned isnt most of his equipment "Soviet" based? Last time I checked the US doesnt make T-72's...
As far as a miltary assult on Irag... we need to be able to do massive, quick river crossings. I wouldnt be surprised if this has something to do w/any wait as well as the myrid other reasons.
xBAT
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
Take the blinkers off, for at least 5 minutes. Which administration trained and armed that particular nutcase? And when you've answered that, which particular adminitration trained and armed the forces of current enemy-of-the-moment, Saddam Hussein?
Hindsight is a great tool, but you've got to use it across the board.
Hint: it's not Clinton or any other Democrat.
BS it sure is. With his indescriminate bombing in the 90's to cover his sleezy ass. That did ALOT to generate the attitude most arabs show towards the USA. I'd tell you to take your blinders off but I honestly think you're blind to common sense and history. Remember that little thing we were in for the 1st half of my life? The cold war?
Yeah maybe we made the mess that is Osama, Al Queda. Now we're going to clean that mess. And it won't be done with casual cruise missle launches at asprin factories. It won't be done to cover the presidents bellybutton because he couldn't keep his zipper up. It will be done because it's the right thing to do, I'd imagine that's a foriegn concept to you though.....
-
Can you name an Al Quaida attack in the 90's that did not result in the attacker's being brought to justice?
-
Uhhh...there was an Embassy nailed in Africa right.... me thinks someone was sitting in his cave chiiling and enjoying the multi-millon dollar camel killers we sent to "obtain" justice for that act...ehh?
xBAT
-
Stick yer head in the sand if you want but if this is true then it won't keep yer bellybutton from being blown off.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020927-60557328.htm
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Can you name an Al Quaida attack in the 90's that did not result in the attacker's being brought to justice?
How many of those behind the '93 bombing of the WTC were brought to justice? Certainly not this one: Abdul Rahman Yasin. Even though Iraq offered to hand him over.
And of course there's OBL, many believe him to be the mastermind behind the attack.
-
Midnight, the title of your post reflects the opinion of many Democrats..and its also a reason why your party lost the election...read on:
A majority of Americans support President Bush's push for war against Iraq and say Democrats are not tough enough in dealing with terrorism, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll shows.
The poll over the weekend also found that most surveyed believe that Republicans have a clearer plan for managing foreign affairs and the economy. Even a majority of Democrats in the survey say their party is too liberal.
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20021112/4613281s.htm
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Can you name an Al Quaida attack in the 90's that did not result in the attacker's being brought to justice?
All of them? They put a few people in jail over the 93 WTC bombing. What about the 2 embassies in Africa? The Cole? The 3 freakin times Sudan offered Clinton OBL on a silver platter?
Give me a break man that's weak....
-
The Cole Trial (http://abc.net.au/news/2002/10/item20021004002406_1.htm)
The Embassies (http://www.infoplease.com/spot/newsfacts-sudanstrikes.html)
Convictions in Embassy Bombings
Four men, believed to be followers of Osama bin Laden, were convicted on May 29, 2001, for their roles in the bombing of American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. The blasts killed 224 people, including 12 Americans. Some 5,000 people were injured.
Mohamed Rashed Daoud al-'Owhali, Khalfan Khamis Mohamed, Wadih al-Hage, and Mohamed Sadeek Odeh are believed to be connected with bin Laden's terrorist organization, al-Qaeda ("The Base"). Another six defendants are in custody, while at least 15 more, including bin Laden, remain at large. 13 suspects in this case, including Osama bin Laden, were placed on the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorists list on Oct. 10, 2001.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
The Cole Trial (http://abc.net.au/news/2002/10/item20021004002406_1.htm)
The Embassies (http://www.infoplease.com/spot/newsfacts-sudanstrikes.html)
where were they put on trial and by whom?
-
Reporter-
"Two F-16 Falcons are taking off to strike at an Iraqi troop concentration south of Baghdad. While it may be Christmas back home, for the guys in 336th tactical fighter wing, it is just another day of war. This is Wolf Blitzer for CNN."
Yeah, my bet is that war is coming before Christmas eve. There is some excellent PR points to score.
The 336th Fighter Squadron (48th Fighter Wing) flies Strike Eagles, handsomehunk. Other than that, here's hoping you're right.
-
Originally posted by Zapata
The 336th Fighter Squadron (48th Fighter Wing) flies Strike Eagles, handsomehunk. Other than that, here's hoping you're right.
Isn't the 336th with the 4th Fighter Wing out of Seymour Johnson? It is Strike Eagles... not F-16s.
Its pretty easy to get the numbers mixed up... eh?
AKDejaVu
-
Originally posted by Zapata
Reporter-
"Two F-16 Falcons are taking off to strike at an Iraqi troop concentration south of Baghdad. While it may be Christmas back home, for the guys in 336th tactical fighter wing, it is just another day of war. This is Wolf Blitzer for CNN."
Yeah, my bet is that war is coming before Christmas eve. There is some excellent PR points to score.
The 336th Fighter Squadron (48th Fighter Wing) flies Strike Eagles, handsomehunk. Other than that, here's hoping you're right.
No aircraft identification charts in Liberal Journalism 101.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
No aircraft identification charts in Liberal Journalism 101.
Let me get this straight. You are using a FAKE news post by a CONSERVATIVE poster to try and slam REAL LIBERALS and REAL NEWS MEDIA?
Cripes.