Ex-RoNiN 0 Posted September 8, 2002 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2243627.stm He knows best because he was there. He is American too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kep Kelagin 1 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Sep. 08 2002,15:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2243627.stm He knows best because he was there. He is American too.<span id='postcolor'> We all know he hass mass-destruction weapons, as he has used them already on his own people... And the world would be just better off without him... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ex-RoNiN 0 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kip Kilaganâ„¢ @ Sep. 08 2002,15:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Sep. 08 2002,15:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2243627.stm He knows best because he was there. He is American too.<span id='postcolor'> We all know he hass mass-destruction weapons, as he has used them already on his own people... And the world would be just better off without him...<span id='postcolor'> So you know more than the guy that has spent 5 years in Iraq working there, his job being to find WMD? You think you know very well about Iraq's military capabilities because you heard that they once used C weapons 20 years ago? How do you know? Have you been there? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kip Kilaganâ„¢ @ Sep. 08 2002,15:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We all know he hass mass-destruction weapons, as he has used them already on his own people...<span id='postcolor'> That is the point. We don't know. There isn't any proof. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And the world would be just better off without him...<span id='postcolor'> At what cost? How many Iraqi civilians are you ready to kill to make it a better world? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duke_of_Ray 0 Posted September 8, 2002 Well if you save more people than you loose, thats what matters. I am not shure about an attack on Iraq, I just do not want a bunch of American soldiers to be killed, anyboyd who helps who soldiers to be killed, or innocent civilians. Sometimes though who have to take losses to keep from taking more losses. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DarkLight 0 Posted September 8, 2002 Killing him won't help if you ask me, there'll be enough ppl that'd want to take his place and do the same thing... You can't just attack a country, kill its leader and think it's solved. Saddam is dangerous but attacking him is not a solution if you ask me.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Col. Kurtz 0 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 08 2002,22:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Sep. 08 2002,11:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And your right about delivery system, but do Iraq have any SCUDS left over from the Gulf War? If so, then theres you delivery platform... ...<span id='postcolor'> Heh Do you know what range a SCUD has? The Iraqi R-17 Â SCUDs has a range of about 300 km. Â Not really a threat Scuds are short range tactical missiles.<span id='postcolor'> I am very aware of the cababilities of the SCUD, but if what happens when the US Marines are going across the dessert in a massive armoured force of the like when a scud with a nuclear warhead on it falls them? Or even better, an infantry division that have halted for a rest or something? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ex-RoNiN 0 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ Sep. 08 2002,15:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well if you save more people than you loose, thats what matters. I am not shure about an attack on Iraq, I just do not want a bunch of American soldiers to be killed, anyboyd who helps who soldiers to be killed, or innocent civilians. Sometimes though who have to take losses to keep from taking more losses.<span id='postcolor'> What losses? Who exactly is at threat? Who is Iraq threatening? Does Iraq have the largest army in the Middle East, ready to create the Middle East version of the 4th Reich? Nope, they are broke, their military is a joke and everyday US+UK airstrikes diminish their military power even more. Saddam is not Hitler. He does not want to take over the world and make them all Arab, he merely wants to stay in Office. He is an old man that wants to stay in Office and stay rich, thats all. The only people that are under thread from Saddam are regime enemies in Iraq, but those are Iraqi domestic policies and nobody has a right to interefere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DarkLight 0 Posted September 8, 2002 I think i agree with Ex Ronin.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duke_of_Ray 0 Posted September 8, 2002 You can have a crap army if ya got nukes. If thy can show that Iraq could get, or has nukes, and that they could use them against the U.S., or another friendly country, then I am all for an attack. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Col. Kurtz 0 Posted September 8, 2002 That is why Bush has managed to conjour up some invisible proof that Iraq has WMD so everyone says "Oh no! He has naughty naughty weapons! George Bush says that they are going to use their invisble SS-18s and SS-20s to blow up our cities! We better go and drop lots of bombs on everything that look anything remotely naughty and be good friends of America". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rhubarbman 0 Posted September 8, 2002 hmm the fact is we can all argue till we are blue, you say he has no proof, how do u know do u work in the pentagon? i think hes gonna have some kind of hard facts that could justify a fight we just have to wait. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Col. Kurtz 0 Posted September 8, 2002 Until he(Bush) shoves a picture in font of the camera that leaves no doubt that Hassien has WMD that he INTENDS TO USE, I will continue to have my doubts. I dont like Suddam, but America playing coyboys again is not the right way to end the show. Having WMD is one thing, planing to use them is another thing. If Al Queda had/has WMD, then waste them becuase it dosnt take a rocket scientist to tell they will use them. America has thousands of nuclear warheads, they are stil around becuase they havent waved them around yet(well they have, but then they had MAD to think about so I doubt they were that serious). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ex-RoNiN 0 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ Sep. 08 2002,16:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You can have a crap army if ya got nukes. If thy can show that Iraq could get, or has  nukes, and that they could use them against the U.S., or another friendly country, then I am all for an attack. <span id='postcolor'> China have nukes and they will use them in a war against the US, should the US start a pre-emptive war with them as well? Russia has nukes and will use them in a war against the US, should the US start a pre-emptive war with them as well? No? Thought so Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paratrooper 0 Posted September 8, 2002 The thing is, he hasn't got nukes yet. Thats why waiting is not a good policy. He won't ever use them openly, that would bring devestation on Iraq, he will give them to someone who can use them while giving him total deniability. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ran 0 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Sep. 08 2002,15:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am very aware of the cababilities of the SCUD, but if what happens when the US Marines are going across the dessert in a massive armoured force of the like when a scud with a nuclear warhead on it falls them? Or even better, an infantry division that have halted for a rest or something?<span id='postcolor'> that's life ....... risk your ass , pay the price ..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Col. Kurtz 0 Posted September 8, 2002 Any sane nation will never use Nukes even if they have them. Its all about MAD. If you nuke us, we'll nuke you to the stone age! There would be no point in engaging America or Russia in a nuclear war unless you were trying to kickstart the apocalypse now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paratrooper 0 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Sep. 08 2002,16:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Any sane nation will never use Nukes even if they have them. Its all about MAD. If you nuke us, we'll nuke you to the stone age! There would be no point in engaging America or Russia in a nuclear war unless you were trying to kickstart the apocalypse now.<span id='postcolor'> As I said, time to learn from september 11th; all he needs to do is give one away! No risk to him or Iraq. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kep Kelagin 1 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Sep. 08 2002,16:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">China have nukes and they will use them in a war against the US, should the US start a pre-emptive war with them as well? Russia has nukes and will use them in a war against the US, should the US start a pre-emptive war with them as well? No? Thought so <span id='postcolor'> Who says that China or Russia would use nuclear bombs in a war against the U.S.A ? And besides, u cant compare Russia or China with Saddam Hussein....Its really too bad that they didn't finished him of when they could during the gulf War. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ran 0 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Sep. 08 2002,16:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Any sane nation will never use Nukes even if they have them. Its all about MAD. If you nuke us, we'll nuke you to the stone age! There would be no point in engaging America or Russia in a nuclear war unless you were trying to kickstart the apocalypse now.<span id='postcolor'> MAD is a cold war threat evaluation  .......... MAD doesn't risk to happen anymore today we wouldn't be "nuked to stone age" , maybe only one our two cities only (sure that's a lot of lifes but not MAD) , the oponent , him would be nuked to stone age , but nobody would rik anything for him wich wasn't the case during the coldwar the nuke capacity of the .... irak , pakistan , china , etc etc etc .... isn't that huge , it surely wouldn't start the MAD effect since most of the links between some "old" powers and other counrties succeptible of being the attackers or attacked doesn't exist anymore or are really different than what they were MAD wasn't only the confrontation of 2 nuclear powers but the confrontation of 2 politic and material alliances : who will help who by attacking who with what kind of nuke the MAD effect is at the origin of the nuclear dissuasion politic of most of the nuclear powers in the 1960's/1980's MAD is the base of the dissuasion doctrine of the coldwar Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ran 0 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kip Kilaganâ„¢ @ Sep. 08 2002,16:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Its really too bad that they didn't finished him of when they could during the gulf War.<span id='postcolor'> you have to take care of your sporting material , a punching ball costs a lot to buy and then to install Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 08 2002,04:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just watching the news and President Bush is saying that they have sattelite photos from the International Atomic Comitee showing that Iraq does have WMD. Do you think these photos do exist, or do you think he just pulled them out of thin air to silence people saying proof is needed? Im not going to go either way. <span id='postcolor'> It is so sad when they are so deperate for finding evidence that is not there. Anyway IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), whose reports they used for 'evidence' denied that they indicate that Iraq is building WMD:<span id='postcolor'> That's right, all the photos show is building reconstruction (site expansion) in "key" areas. Airports, factorys, etc. I don't think you can call normal looking buildings actual evidence. (seen the photos) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert Schweitzer 10 Posted September 8, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 08 2002,15:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">0--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Sep. 08 2002,150)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But wait! One thing we shouldnt forget is that those uncontrollable states try to get atomic-weapons. What do we do if one day Iraq actually has them functioning. What do you do then? Any army approaching Hussein would be blown to dust. You got to think forward. Either now or never.<span id='postcolor'> Was this irony? If yes, never mind the rest of my post. As long as he is kept under UN observation there is no problem. Even if he got nukes we would have more. The possibility of some action in the future hardly justifies a military operation that will kill at leat thousands of civilians.<span id='postcolor'> Yes, this was irony. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ran 0 Posted September 8, 2002 <span style='font-size:22pt;line-height:100%'>MY EVIDENCES</span> this satellite picture has been take ten minutes ago credits : me and my fantastic creativity , and mister B. Gates for his fantastic graphic tool Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ran 0 Posted September 8, 2002 haven't found the wmd's themselves nor the nuke delivery devices yet ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
