wtf is wrong with the French?

[SLO]

1 - ok hortland...we know your for war against Irak....cool....thats your OPINION

2 - you hate the french....not cause it differs from you opinion....but you really hate em

3 - who the diddly are you to tell what the french can or cannot do

4 - Canada...Russia...Spain....Ge rmany...France...NONE of the above are puppets to the US policies of interest....THEY WILL WORK THRU THE UNITED NATIONS.....not the swedish hortland opinion of what should be done

6 - in my book unless your a soldier gettin ready to fight for your OPINION....go diddly yourself.....your opinion means nothing but hot air

7 - now if we would talk about something really scary....NORTH KOREA....who openly SAY that they DO have WMD...send some popsicle bellybutton swedish soldiers to go kick there ass...can't wait to see that

[Hortlund]

I guess it was too complicated to list them in numerical order SLO?

(Hint: 5 comes after 4 and before 6)

[Dowding]

1) Iraq has used Chemical weapons against civilian Kurds and against Iran.

Britain fully intended to use chemical weapons back in 1919, but lacked a delivery system Turkey has repeatedly bombed, shot and repressed the Kurds in their territory. As have the Syrians. It's a regional tradition.

2) Iraq had alot of Biological and Chemical weapons in 1991. These weapons have not been accounted for by the weapon inspectors.

Weapons supplied by the US and her allies. Rummy Rumsfeld was involved in the supply of Anthrax technology transfer. 95% of these weapons were destroyed during the previoius weapons inspections. We are now looking for the last 5%.

3) Iraq supports Hamas, Hezbollah and the Al Accsxa Brigades directly.

I'd like to see more evidence of this. Got any links? I'm lazy.

4) Iraq have been trying to manufacture/get their hands on nuclear weapons since the mid 80:s.

Not really - they were given them by the US and other NATO member states to fight the Iranians. We know Saddam has them, because we gave them him!

5) Iraq has killed tens of thousands of its own civilians.

So has North Korea, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. So has half the world. The world is generally a nasty place.

6) Iraqi security forces use torture against Iraqi citizens.

So does Saudi Arabia, our supposed ally. So does Kuwait. So does North Korea. So does China. So does most of the world.

7) Since 1991 Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died because of an embargo that is in place because Saddam refuses to let the UN disarm him.

Sanctions have gifted Saddam a stick with which to beat the West. He can tell his people the West are responsible for their continued suffering and garner further anti-Western sentiment. They have been counter-productive at best.

8) Iraq had repeatedly stated that the state of Israel must be destroyed.

Hardly a reason to start a war. I don't want to see any British troops dead in the name of Israel.  

9) Iraq has repeatedly violated previous UN resolutions.

Israel is currently in violation of numerous UN resolutions dating back decades. Yet this is not only overlooked, currently the US supplies Israel with $60 billion a year in military aid. Let's not pretend UN resolutions have any relevance - more like selective relevance.

[Hortlund]

wtf does N Korea have to do with things?

So both Iraq and N Korea are evil f*cking nations, does that mean we should ignore both of them because we cant prove which one is more evil? Brilliant logic.

The reasons 1-9 combined is the reason why Iraq must be neutralized. You will not find that 1-9 combination in any other nation.

And Dowding. No one has given Iraq any nuclear weapons. At least read my posts before you reply to them.

[straffo]

Originally posted by Hortlund
Straffo.

So if I understand your post correctly you are saying this:

"Nothing of that is US propaganda, in fact all the points you listed are true. However, some other nations are also evil."

Well then Straffo. I have to ask you. What is the US propaganda that I have fallen for?

The propaganda saying : Iraq is the most evil (as they will start a war against ...).
Sorry to say Iraq is one of the evil and far from being the most dangerous it's only the most visible on US network.

Originally posted by Hortlund
Straffo, I have to return to some of your answers that I find highly questionable.

Riyadh ( =Saudi government) has never directly supported for Hamas, Hezbollah or other terrorist organizations.

The UN disarmament of Iraq is with regards to BC. They can keep their conventional weapons. Now I ask you what the he** do you mean when you say that Iraq will be unprotected without these weapons. Does that mean that you think BC is ok?

Why is it wrong that Iraq wants to destroy Israel? It is wrong because it would mean that millions of jews would be murdered...again. Frankly I thought you would find that at least a bit wrong...apparently not.

Being hypocrite like the Saoudian can protect you from US anger ?
They created  organisations founding terrorism for me they are guilty of giving money (not directly I agree) to terrorism so I make no difference between Saoudian and Iraq.

About Isreal ?
It's what happen to all invader : they get assimilated by local population or destroyed and as they won't be assimilated ... sadly it's destiny is written

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Dowding

Britain fully intended to use chemical weapons back in 1919, but lacked a delivery system Turkey has repeatedly bombed, shot and repressed the Kurds in their territory. As have the Syrians. It's a regional tradition.

[/b]
No, it is not a regional tradition to gas civilians. In fact, Iraq is the only nation on this planet who has been doing that since you know who in the 40:s.

Weapons supplied by the US and her allies. Rummy Rumsfeld was involved in the supply of Anthrax technology transfer. 95% of these weapons were destroyed during the previoius weapons inspections. We are now looking for the last 5%.

[/b]
Im sorry but does this change the fact that Iraq has these weapons and that they are unaccounted for?

I'd like to see more evidence of this. Got any links? I'm lazy.

[/b]
You should know better than to rely on internet sources Dowding. Anyway, I am lazy too, but this is common knowledge heck even Tareq Aziz has openly stated that it is so.

Not really - they were given them by the US and other NATO member states to fight the Iranians. We know Saddam has them, because we gave them him!

[/b]
Nukes? Yeah right...

So has North Korea, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. So has half the world. The world is generally a nasty place.

...

So does Saudi Arabia, our supposed ally. So does Kuwait. So does North Korea. So does China. So does most of the world.

[/b]
We dont. And the fact that other nations does it too doesnt really justify it.

Sanctions have gifted Saddam a stick with which to beat the West. He can tell his people the West are responsible for their continued suffering and garner further anti-Western sentiment. They have been counter-productive at best.

[/b]
yeah, some stick to beat us with...the only ones who really (pretend that they) care are the French/varios newspaper reporters/other liberal types and they are just looking for an excuse to avoid this war.

Israel is currently in violation of numerous UN resolutions dating back decades. Yet this is not only overlooked, currently the US supplies Israel with $60 billion a year in military aid. Let's not pretend UN resolutions have any relevance - more like selective relevance.

As I said, only Iraq has the 1-9 combo. And I know that you hate Israel and all, but at the end of the day, Israel is the democracy, and Iraq is the country led by a mad dictator...think about that.

[Naso]

We will need to separate the use of facts as propaganda, from the invention of fact for the same scope, btw...

Originally posted by Hortlund
1) Iraq has used Chemical weapons against civilian Kurds and against Iran.

Yes, We have TV images (and I have a direct witness, an Iranian former soldier), so it is true, no propaganda origined.

2) Iraq had alot of Biological and Chemical weapons in 1991. These weapons have not been accounted for by the weapon inspectors.

We have proves (they used it with kurds) of the possesion of chemical weapons, about the biological ones (worst, much worst and dangerous even of the nukes), there are no proves aside the US declarations and/or suspects.

3) Iraq supports Hamas, Hezbollah and the Al Accsxa Brigades directly.

Maybe they offer training camps, but there are no direct proves of the government involvement (Will be the same as to say that because a terrorist cell was found in UK, the UK is supporting terrorists).
BTW, I guess it's probable.

4) Iraq have been trying to manufacture/get their hands on nuclear weapons since the mid 80:s.

Like almost 50% of the countries in the world.

5) Iraq has killed tens of thousands of its own civilians.

I guess yes, but seem a little generic (we can say the same of a lot of our allies).

6) Iraqi security forces use torture against Iraqi citizens.

Probable, you can be surprised how few country dont use torture in this world.

7) Since 1991 Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died because of an embargo that is in place because Saddam refuses to let the UN disarm him.

This statement it's what urged me to answer, the western countries have enforced the enbargo, so they are responsable of the civilian losses, it's like a burglar that say: " if I shoot you it's your responsability, because you did'nt obey my orders".

8) Iraq had repeatedly stated that the state of Israel must be destroyed.

And a lot of other states have declared the same, like a lot of other states have declared that Iraq must be destroyed.

9) Iraq has repeatedly violated previous UN resolutions.

Like a lot of other "friendly" nations, beginning with Israel (well, in the past, at least).

All this 9 points can be easly (maybe with the exception of point 1) applied to many many nations in the world.

So what?

We are going to wage war to the entire non-western world??

Maybe this is the real objective.

(electronic voice)

"Your resistance is futile, you will be assimilated"

The marketborg.

[Dowding]

So both Iraq and N Korea are evil f*cking nations, does that mean we should ignore both of them because we cant prove which one is more evil? Brilliant logic.

Where did you get that ridiculous assertion from? I'd say it's your logic that is faulty. North Korea is the biggest threat. Tackle that first.

Your nine points of wisdom can be applied to North Korea, except for the Israel one. Frankly, in terms of global stability and world peace, North Korea is by the far greater threat. They have nuclear reactors ready to go to produce the material for weapons, they have the beginnings of ICBM technology.

They have links with Yemen, the No.1 holiday destination for your aspiring Islamic nutcase terrorists. They have sent arms there. Going by your previous logic regarding guilt by association, it quite possible for nuclear material to reach Yemen and then be distributed to whichever terrorist group you could name.

How do you think a nation develops nuclear weapons? Is it through physics textbooks? Through a degree in physics? I studied alot of advanced nuclear physics as part of my course. I know how nuclear weapons work, I understand many of the problems associated with nuclear weapons development. Could I build one? Of course not. There so much ancilliary knowledge required, it is a huge undertaking. So where does a country like Iraq get that kind of specialist knowledge? Through unscrupulous Western experts, broke Russian scientists etc of course.

The main focus of the UN WMD expert's search is chemical and biological weapons - they believe these are the weapons Saddam had, because we gave them him. Nuclear weapons are only what he actively desires.

Take out Saddam - but let's sort out North Korea first.

And I know that you hate Israel and all

lol I don't hate Israel - I support its existance as State, just as I support the Palestinian rights to a self-determined state of some kind. I just detest their current administration, and Sharon in particular. He's not fit to be a leader of any country given his glorious past.

You on the other hand, would defend them to the hilt on any issue - even if they started gassing Palestinians and pushing their still warm bodies into gas chambers.

[-dead-]

My guess: the hot French girl Hortlund's been eyeing for a month told him to get lost.

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Dowding

Take out Saddam - but let's sort out North Korea first.

Im sorry but it has to be the other way around since the US army is deploying to the Iraqi border right now.

Has N Korea used chemical weapons on other nations btw?

[Naso]

Originally posted by Hortlund
Has N Korea used chemical weapons on other nations btw?

Who cares?

We can use some South Korean soldier dressed in NK uniform and claim they used it.

(Hint hint look the past )

[deSelys]

Saddam is a dictator...we all agree. He's done a lot of baaad things in the past...we all agree.

BUT his links with Islamic terrorism are not based on facts. Let us not be fooled. This war is about oil. US feels that while Saudi Arabia keeps a 'friendly' face, this land is financing a lot of terrorist organisations. It is more than probable than, within years, the oil tap from S.A. shuts down towards the west. So US is is looking for an (easy) alternative...who said Iraq?

Add to this that by doing this Bush Jr has the opportunity to complete his father's unfinished work...but I'm sure this doesn't enter into the equation, politicians are known for doing only logical things...

Getting control of the Iraqi oil resources wouldn't be a bad move for western countries, and I'm sure Europe would benefit from it too. I just don't feel comfortable with the method employed. Maybe i'm too naive or idealistic.
Another point to consider is that this war will only fuel (no pun intended) the western hate by islam-bidding people. Price could be very expensive at the long term.

I am not anti-US at all. I visited enough US graveyards in Normandy and in the Ardennes to know what we owe to this country. But I like to believe that I've kept a free mind. This war would be, IMO, another sad episode in a part of the world where USA played the wizard-apprentice and showed not much common sense during the last decades...

And while we are discussing about this, NK feels free to sneer at the world again and begins to grow new claws (now THIS is one topic which needs action soon IMO).

Anyway, war in Iraq won't start before all the Saddam opponent parties agree on a successor...and discussions don't seem to evolve much at this time.


BTW, Hortlund, you're clueless, and your ideas have a disturbing and unpleasant scent. I don't know the swedish law, but I'm astonished a judge is allowed to explain publicly his political opinions at such length...you should be a bit more careful. Somebody pissed off enough could bring a serious blow to your promising career...

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by deSelys
BUT his links with Islamic terrorism are not based on facts.

So the fact that the Iraqi government pays $ 10 000 to every suicide bomber should not be taken as an example of support for terrorism?

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by deSelys
BTW, Hortlund, you're clueless, and your ideas have a disturbing and unpleasant scent. I don't know the swedish law, but I'm astonished a judge is allowed to explain publicly his political opinions at such length...you should be a bit more careful. Somebody pissed off enough could bring a serious blow to your promising career...

wtf is that supposed to mean? I mean seriously?

As for my culelessness, you are more than welcome to argue my points instead of posting some veiled threat.

[Ripsnort]

.