Iraq strike 'would open hell's gates'

[second_draw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Sep. 06 2002,00:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">it won't open gates of hell, but it will be extremely hard for US to win by itself, if not impossible.

i won't be startled if someone claim that US getting into war with Iraq by itself would be second Vietnam.<span id='postcolor'>

The problem with Vietnam i feel was the all the ppl weren't with the US. Unlike Vietnam, according to stuff a have read, the Iraqi population are against sadaam.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bogo @ Sep. 06 2002,08:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Sep. 06 2002,09:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Operation Desert Storm is not to compare with the miltitary efforts needed to bring Saddam out of business. This will cost many US and allied lives. That´s for sure. I am not the one to judge if this is needed or not but at my current state of knowledge it wouldnt be a wise decision to start a war.

Why ? Maybe you missed something but the middle east ist a barrel of TNT at the moment and a military intervention could cause more bad things than we all expect or can handle.Neither US nor NATO is able to handle a conflict in this huge region on a large extend. Additionally there is always a time beyond war and noone knows by now how an unsupported war will influence the relations with the whole region for a long time.<span id='postcolor'>

I quite agree with you there. But let's not forget why bush is doing this. His doing this to correct his fathers mistake. It's not because Saddam has nuclear weapon. I am pretty shure if he had one he woulden't be sow quite and sitting in his corner. This guy is warmonger and a Dictator. But i think here the issue is not if US can handle Iraq alone because i think they can. It's how the rest of the middle east will act. Right now the people are angry At Us for not doing anything on the Palestinian Issue , Attaking Afghanistan and having Us bases in various countryes in the middle east.<span id='postcolor'>

Maybe Saddam does have nuclear and biological weapons... he just isnt advertising with it like Bush does. Maybe Saddam is only willing to use those weapons in the most pressed situation.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (LauryThorn @ Sep. 06 2002,16:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would like to ask all of you this little simple question:

What are you ready to die for?

Is it your country, your family, etc..

If you are ready to die for your country, what kind of circumstances is that?

Would you like to die across the ocean in desert, fighting for The Right Thingâ„¢?

Or would be you rather let someone take over your country than die for it?<span id='postcolor'>

I would be rather happy to die for the freedom of people who deserved freedom. And as always, death before dishonour.

[WhoCares 0]

Just to add some things to this discussion:

1. US will have no support for an attack from other arab countries, maybe(! except of Kuwait. So the only chance to get their troops in there in high numbers and with heavy equipement would be via the NATO partner Turkey (if the NATO would get involved in it at all!.

2. It is not sufficient to eliminate Saddam. It's is his whole clan, that controls almost the entire country.

3. It will be almost impossible to establish a new stable government after the war. There are mainly three groups in Iraq, the Kurds in the north, the Shiites in the south, both protected by the none-flying zones and the Sunites, which is the majority and Saddams ethnic group. the Kurds are fighting for an own country with parts of Turkey and Iraq and thus are no option for a stable government. The Shiites are the muslim majority and could expect support from many other arab countries (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Iran), but in Iraq they are a minority and there have been always conflicts between Shiites and Sunites (Iran vs. Iraq). And With a new 'sunitish' government it is pretty likely that you will change almost nothing...

4. There is the possiblilty that the Arab League would shut down the oil supply to the US/west. Would be interesting to see the planes fly without fuel. And even worse, it would hit the world economy very hard...

5. Maybe the USA should consider to build camps like those for the japanese citizens in WW2

[Col. Kurtz 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (WhoCares @ Sep. 06 2002,18:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just to add some things to this discussion:

1. US will have no support for an attack from other arab countries, maybe(! except of Kuwait. So the only chance to get their troops in there in high numbers and with heavy equipement would be via the NATO partner Turkey (if the NATO would get involved in it at all!.

2. It is not sufficient to eliminate Saddam. It's is his whole clan, that controls almost the entire country.

3. It will be almost impossible to establish a new stable government after the war. There are mainly three groups in Iraq, the Kurds in the north, the Shiites in the south, both protected by the none-flying zones and the Sunites, which is the majority and Saddams ethnic group. the Kurds are fighting for an own country with parts of Turkey and Iraq and thus are no option for a stable government. The  Shiites are the muslim majority and could expect support from many other arab countries (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Iran), but in Iraq they are a minority and there have been always conflicts between Shiites and Sunites (Iran vs. Iraq). And With a new 'sunitish' government it is pretty likely that you will change almost nothing...

4. There is the possiblilty that the Arab League would shut down the oil supply to the US/west. Would be interesting to see the planes fly without fuel. And even worse, it would hit the world economy very hard...

5. Maybe the USA should consider to build camps like those for the japanese citizens in WW2  <span id='postcolor'>

You have many good points there, and to back up your arguments, look at what is happening in Afghanistan. The President nearly got assisnated. Many of the tribes are stillnot happy and the US troops are still having to quash pockets of resistance from time to time. As for point 5, Im sure they would if they could get away with it.

P.S., for a name like who cares, you have strong political views

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Sep. 06 2002,10:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (LauryThorn @ Sep. 06 2002,16:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would like to ask all of you this little simple question:

What are you ready to die for?

Is it your country, your family, etc..

If you are ready to die for your country, what kind of circumstances is that?

Would you like to die across the ocean in desert, fighting for The Right Thingâ„¢?

Or would be you rather let someone take over your country than die for it?<span id='postcolor'>

I would be rather happy to die for the freedom of people who deserved freedom. And as always, death before dishonour.<span id='postcolor'>

Good man.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

7--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 06 2002,017)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I give the operation a 50/50 chance of being executed. It all now depends what Bush's pet dog Blair does.<span id='postcolor'>

Reminds me of the new video of George Michael. You should watch it once! It is made like a comic and there you also see how Bush throws a piece of wood and Blair catches it like a dog...but that is not all, the video is really really awesome!

I havent really made up my mind yet. On the one hand this war could bring an end to the sanctions, on the other you risk a lot. This is also the opinion of the kurds living in Iraq

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Sep. 06 2002,14:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 06 2002,01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I give the operation a 50/50 chance of being executed. It all now depends what Bush's pet dog Blair does.<span id='postcolor'>

<!--emo& Reminds me of the new video of George Michael. You should watch it once! It is made like a comic and there you also see how Bush throws a piece of wood and Blair catches it like a dog...but that is not all, the video is really really awesome!

I havent really made up my mind yet. On the one hand this war could bring an end to the sanctions, on the other you risk a lot. This is also the opinion of the kurds living in Iraq<span id='postcolor'>

The video is pretty naff as the joke is old, the music is also terrible!

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

well he is not really my favourite composer and his music doesnt represent my taste but this video is fun to watch and he even takes the piss out of hinmself and his gayness!

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 06 2002,15:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The video is pretty naff as the joke is old, the music is also terrible!<span id='postcolor'>

The music is boring in most respects, but the video itself is brilliant

[Die Alive 0]

I want to know if and or when there is a war with Iraq, will the ravers and hip-hop kids and young adults protest the war the same way that the hippies did back in the 60s.

-=Die Alive=-

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Die Alive @ Sep. 06 2002,10:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I want to know if and or when there is a war with Iraq, will the ravers and hip-hop kids and young adults protest the war the same way that the hippies did back in the 60s.

-=Die Alive=-<span id='postcolor'>

I think so, there are already dozens of musicians even in the USA talking about how US policy caused 9/11, and how much death the US is and was causing around the world.

[bogo 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Sep. 06 2002,20:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Die Alive @ Sep. 06 2002,10:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I want to know if and or when there is a war with Iraq, will the ravers and hip-hop kids and young adults protest the war the same way that the hippies did back in the 60s.

-=Die Alive=-<span id='postcolor'>

I think so, there are already dozens of musicians even in the USA talking about how US policy caused 9/11, and how much death the US is and was causing around the world.<span id='postcolor'>

Are they because for me semms that the americans are still as naive and think that they have never done anything wrong.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bogo @ Sep. 06 2002,13:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Are they because ...<span id='postcolor'>

Yes they are, but it's very hard for them to get support and air time. As you can imagine. Ofcourse none of the rich kids will speak out as they are seldom informed or have never realized what life is like outside of USA. they have it all made.

[Sam Samson 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Sep. 06 2002,19:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Die Alive @ Sep. 06 2002,10:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I want to know if and or when there is a war with Iraq, will the ravers and hip-hop kids and young adults protest the war the same way that the hippies did back in the 60s.

-=Die Alive=-<span id='postcolor'>

I think so, there are already dozens of musicians even in the USA talking about how US policy caused 9/11, and how much death the US is and was causing around the world.<span id='postcolor'>

you guys make me weep. this is a classical example of how leftists construct the victim into the actual aggressor. this is ridiculous. loopy logic.

for the record: the US never did anything to mr bin laden, who is a millionaire and still never did anything for his people than deal in death, or his gang of killers.

on a less vitriolic, more sober note:

you can't underestimate saddan hassim like chamberlain and the rest of his dovish colleagues did hitler in the 30s.

he is aggressive. he gassed 1000s of his own people. he probably has wmds.

also, you have to look beyond this present crisis.

for the US to topple saddam means it is willing to get involved into nation building. that costs billions and billions, and the outcome in that region of the world is far from certain.

it might work if the victory comes swift. but I doubt it will.

right now I'm for containment, whatever that may entail, not war. the US will need at least the leading nations of europe in some sort of agreement. (lest they start sabotaging too.)

but I trust president bush to do the right thing. he knows more than we do and he has able advisers.

(and he's not like ole slick, who bombed iraq every time a scandal was about to break at home.)

[bn880 5]

Sam, i am not reading the rest of your post, this is my answer: I have stated some facts. Loopy logic is your business.

[Scorpio 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Sep. 06 2002,00:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">it won't open gates of hell, but it will be extremely hard for US to win by itself, if not impossible.

i won't be startled if someone claim that US getting into war with Iraq by itself would be second Vietnam.<span id='postcolor'>

It CAN win by itself. Iraq has very little supplies, and is one of the worst armies in the world. I have seen it for myself a long time ago.

Just look at the US firepower...

[Rhubarbman 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Sep. 06 2002,00:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And about the logistics issue. Dont forget that most US-machinery is not just waiting in hangars, readily polished for the next war. No they are used everyday. may it be for fire-fighting, rescue actions, and secure the motherland. A war in Iraq (and consequently much of the logistics being moved there) would allow terrorists to get an easier way into the US and to blow up whatever they would like!<span id='postcolor'>

Actually it is, they have stockpiled enough military hardware to green light it in kuwait, but they dont have the man power so they would have to ship out the troops and crews.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sam Samson @ Sep. 06 2002,20:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">you guys make me weep.   this is a classical example of how leftists construct the victim into the actual aggressor. this is ridiculous. loopy logic.

for the record: the US never did anything to mr bin laden, who is a millionaire and still never did anything for his people than deal in death, or his gang of killers.<span id='postcolor'>

The US supported muslim factions in Afghanistan during the Soviet period. When the Soviets withdrew, the US backed out as well, abandoning their 'allies'. The US has a history of propping up corrupt regimes who act in the best interests of the United States, yet going after equally corrupt regimes who arent in their pocket.

The US uses other nations as it sees fit without regard for the consequences. The US tries to impose its own brand of morality and thought on other nations, regardless of whether it is wanted or not.

It is the blatant 'head in the sand' attitude that most americans have to the machinations of their own government that leads to comments like yours Sam. I am not accusing you of being willfully ignorant to US foreign policy of the last 30 years... I am just saying that such ignorance is more often than not the status quo for the average American citizen.

[Rhubarbman 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Scorpio @ Sep. 06 2002,23:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Sep. 06 2002,00:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">it won't open gates of hell, but it will be extremely hard for US to win by itself, if not impossible.

i won't be startled if someone claim that US getting into war with Iraq by itself would be second Vietnam.<span id='postcolor'>

It CAN win by itself. Iraq has very little supplies, and is one of the worst armies in the world. I have seen it for myself a long time ago.

Just look at the US firepower...<span id='postcolor'>

yes but you going to have to go into the streets and cities, there will be fierce resistence from the locas as your invading there home, also iraq's population are being tricked into believing its a war against muslims so its gonna be hard, i doubt the us alone could do it as the EU actually spent more on the Gulf than the us did, also if they do go in alone i doubt anyone would be there for peacekeeping so thats anothor thing the US will have to do.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 06 2002,23:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The US supported muslim factions in Afghanistan during the Soviet period.  When the Soviets withdrew, the US backed out as well, abandoning their 'allies'.  The US has a history of propping up corrupt regimes who act in the best interests of the United States, yet going after equally corrupt regimes who arent in their pocket.<span id='postcolor'>

the funny thing is, US, upon inervention in any conflict, usually stays in that region. and that's one of the things that anti-US ppl criticized.

with Afghanistan, after Russians withdrew, so did US. and now US is getting criticized for leaving the country alone?

[pearce 0]

If America went into Iraq it wouldn't be a war that could be won from twenty thousand feet with laser guided missles, they will have to fight on the ground and accept the losses. Then they will have to install a new government and how stable will that be? look at Afganistan this last week.

How much of a threat is Sadam? With all the media and (i assume) intellegence services watching his every move the man can hardly take a piss without the CIA knowing about it. If he had nukes would he use them? Of course not, the man craves power, why would he throw that away in the face of overwhelming american nuclear/ military superiority? He isn't a ideologist, he's a practical man and will do anything to stay in power, by threatening him with war we are more likely to push him to extremes. By replacing him by force we risk creating another generation of fundamentalists who see America and her allies as the route cause of all evil.

It seem to me that Bush, after failing to catch Bin Laden (or however you spell his name) is trying to draw attention away from the failed war on terrorism by getting into a new war with Iraq. Blair just worries me full stop, he isn't too bad on domestic issues but when the yanks say jump etc. we shouldn't blindly follow America because of some misconcieved notion of there being a special relationship.

[SirLoins 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote (denoir @ Sep. 06 2002,017)

I give the operation a 50/50 chance of being executed. It all now depends what Bush's pet dog Blair does.

Reminds me of the new video of George Michael. You should watch it once! It is made like a comic and there you also see how Bush throws a piece of wood and Blair catches it like a dog...but that is not all, the video is really really awesome!<span id='postcolor'>

I can't believe you would give a rats ass about someone arrested in California for exposing himself to a police officer in a public bathroom.

Why would you give any weight to any musician, movie star, athlete, or any other celebrity opinion, simply based on their celebrity status?

Their political statements, whether on an MTV interview, or in the lyrics of their music are simply trying to cash in on what they think is popular thought on a particular subject. You don't think it's all about the money? HA!

[Rhubarbman 0]

He don't just follow them, hes taken a judgement and acted on it, the fact is "Sad-ham" will never use Nukes or Chem on the the US but what happens if those get stolen os so convinently and get into the hands of the al queda or some other anti-west group? I aint see it yet but if someone thinks its for oil your mistaken as it would take a good 5-10 years to get the Iraq oil fields up to scratch and pumping oil at a good level.

[Chill 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Sep. 06 2002,19:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">-=Die Alive=-<span id='postcolor'>

I really hope that is true! America really have to own up to its bad world policies. There was a show about Argentina and how they have been opressed and America just watched. A women said "Now America knows how it feels to be hurt"