Bush is pushing too far

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Sep. 20 2002,20:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Probably that Americans were publically not liked at that time, just like now.     I think.<span id='postcolor'>

the french supported them .... remember , lafayette , the tea cases .... etc etc .....

[Burl 0]

Oh just that the Americans got tired of British rule a long time ago...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Maybe if we start respecting their cultures and their way of life, they wont feel the need to hate us any more.<span id='postcolor'>

[Tovarish 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Burl @ Sep. 20 2002,20:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh just that the Americans got tired of British rule a long time ago...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Maybe if we start respecting their cultures and their way of life, they wont feel the need to hate us any more.<span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'>

Lol. man are you ever off on a tangent. Not to mention your argument dosen't make sense. The british left the US alone over a hundred years ago, and the US still has quite a presence in the middle east

[KingBeast 0]

America now is like Britain was/is, which is kind of funny, considering you guys were so eager to get rid of us Im referring to the general arrogance and feeling of superiority and international immunity(i need to make a disclaimer for "This does not apply to all americans, but is just the general impression that outsiders get")

[ran 0]

so if i understand your reasoning , then you agree with the fact that the US interventions in mid east are a pain in the ass of the inhabitants of those regions and that you would remove your troops from here (with or without the use or force) ? and that you finally agree that the mid-east inhabitants aren't jealous of the US economy ? and that the arabs could throw coca cola cans in the see like the yanks did with the tea ?

-edit- : i'm drunk

[Burl 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Lol. man are you ever off on a tangent. <span id='postcolor'>

You are correct sir. We Americans are the most unpredictable people in the world.

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Burl @ Sep. 20 2002,20:56)</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">Lol. man are you ever off on a tangent. <span id='postcolor'>

You are correct sir. We Americans are the most unpredictable people in the world.<span id='postcolor'>

the most unpredictable , the thoughest , the strongest the most beautifull ....... erm , wait ... that's the frenchmen

[KingBeast 0]

I know ive said my offtopic piece, but lets keep this on topic ladies and gents.

Oh and Ran, you are quite mistaken. I think you are referring to Englishmen

[Burl 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">remove your troops from here (with or without the use or force) ? and that you finally agree that the mid-east inhabitants aren't jealous of the US economy ? and that the arabs could throw coca cola cans in the see like the yanks did with the tea ?<span id='postcolor'>

If it was up to me, I'd pull all of troops overseas and bring them home. Let the poker chips fall as they may.

They should toss Coca Cola away.. its bad for you.

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KingBeast @ Sep. 20 2002,21:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I know ive said my offtopic piece, but lets keep this on topic ladies and gents.

Oh and Ran, you are quite mistaken. I think you are referring to Englishmen  <span id='postcolor'>

hmmmm yeah was my mistake , was referring to the europeans in general (except the germans and italians )

let's go back on topic

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Sep. 20 2002,14:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the most unpredictable , the thoughest , the strongest the most beautifull ....... erm , wait ... that's the frenchmen <span id='postcolor'>

Hmmm.... I don't want to get off topic.

Good to see that at least someone new is considering looking at American ways.

[Renagade 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Sep. 20 2002,20:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">so if i understand your reasoning , then you agree with the fact that the US interventions in mid east are a pain in the ass of the inhabitants of those regions and that you would remove your troops from here (with or without the use or force) ? and that you finally agree that the mid-east inhabitants aren't jealous of the US economy ? and that the arabs could throw coca cola cans in the see like the yanks did with the tea ?

-edit- : i'm drunk<span id='postcolor'>

Thye didnt like tea,ARE THEY INSANE !!

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Renagade @ Sep. 20 2002,22:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thye didnt like tea,ARE THEY INSANE !! <span id='postcolor'>

Actually they loved tea and still do, but hate to admit it. Why do you think American coffee is not coffee, but coffe flavoured water?

[foxer 0]

Do you guys think saddam has chemical weapons ? If you say yes,do you think he's going let inspectors see them ?

If you say no,that he doesn't have chemical weapon,you should see what he did to his sons-in-laws,when they gave out the truth.

I truly don't know understand anyones  point though.You don't want the U.S. to bomb,ok,But why not ? Because a few thousands civilians will die ? I hate to tell you but those few are dying now,because of sanctions.But i don't agree on attacking iraq,i believe they need to find saddam,someway,somehow and just bomb him.Also bomb all his palaces,he has 20 of them.

[edc 0]

Heres some bits and peices of an essay I'm writing for school about why we should attack Iraq.

Saddam has violated treaties signed at the end of the Gulf War by a) firing on a/c patrolling the no-fly zone over 130 times in 2002 alone and b) not letting UN weapons inspectors in. Even if he does let weapon inspectors in they will almost certainly have to give the Iraqis a notice before they search anywhere. He also has chemical & biological weapons. The sick bastard even used chemical weapons against his own people-the Khurds. Finally Iraq is not too far away from having nuclear weapons. They could have a nuclear warhead by 2004. Using SCUDs he would probably target a major city in Israel or less likely Riyadh. He could also give them to terrorist groups for them to use. The target for that could be anywhere-New York, Washington, London, Moscow, Tokyo, or any other major world city. Also the people of Iraq have almost no freedom.

<span style='color:red'>THAT IS WHY WE SHOULD ATTACK IRAQ</span>

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Do you guys think saddam has chemical weapons ? If you say yes,do you think he's going let inspectors see them ?

If you say no,that he doesn't have chemical weapon,you should see what he did to his sons-in-laws,when they gave out the truth.

I truly don't know understand anyones  point though.You don't want the U.S. to bomb,ok,But why not ? Because a few thousands civilians will die ? I hate to tell you but those few are dying now,because of sanctions.But i don't agree on attacking iraq,i believe they need to find saddam,someway,somehow and just bomb him.Also bomb all his palaces,he has 20 of them.

<span id='postcolor'>

1) Regardless if he has or has not chemical weapons, it is not a reason to bomb him. He hasn't done anything. Should we bomb the USA because they have WMD?

2) Why is is bad to bomb Iraq?

[*] Civilian deaths

[*] Allied deaths

[*] Increased oil prices

[*] Precedence for other countries to bomb anybody that might in the future be a threat of them

[*] Pointless - Saddam poses no threat to the world

[*] You will fuck up the Israel/Palestine question even more

[*] Alienation of the islamic/arab nations

[*] Market instability

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Sep. 20 2002,22:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Do you guys think saddam has chemical weapons ? If you say yes,do you think he's going let inspectors see them ?

If you say no,that he doesn't have chemical weapon,you should see what he did to his sons-in-laws,when they gave out the truth.

I truly don't know understand anyones  point though.You don't want the U.S. to bomb,ok,But why not ? Because a few thousands civilians will die ? I hate to tell you but those few are dying now,because of sanctions.But i don't agree on attacking iraq,i believe they need to find saddam,someway,somehow and just bomb him.Also bomb all his palaces,he has 20 of them.<span id='postcolor'>

A lot of countries have chemical weapons. And I bet more than a few of them have little love for the good old US of A. Basically what Bush Doctrine 2.0 is saying is that as soon as a nation earns the ire of the US, it's ok to attack them because they MAY become a threat at some point. That is, to put it simply, terrorism. You are using terror (tell me heavy bombing by B 52's isnt terror) to acheive your goals. And it's time for the world to say 'Enough is enough'

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Sep. 20 2002,22:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">He also has chemical & biological weapons.  The sick bastard even used chemical weapons against his own people-the Khurds.  <span id='postcolor'>

Not chemical weapons. Napalm, baby. The same as you used so happily in Vietnam.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Finally Iraq is not too far away from having nuclear weapons.  They could have a nuclear warhead by 2004. <span id='postcolor'>

Bullshit. They are trying to prove (and have failed so far) that some aluminium tubes that were sent to Iraq were part of a covert nuclear program. There exists no evidence of such a nuclear program, much less estimates of when they might have nukes.

This whole debate is so ridiculous. It couldn't be more transparent then it is. I don't however blame Bush. You see Bush is a moron. My left shoe has higher IQ then he has. He is just a puppet for the right wing hawks like Rumsfeld and Cheney.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Oh great, our female ministre of justice has compared "bush with Hitler". Now you people know what it is like in Germany with the political situation a and those ´morons are most likely to be reelected.

So in case you see a german in your country then ask him what he votes for. In case he votes left-wing then hinder him from going to the election. Either you steal his air-ticket, sabotage an elevator so he is stuck for day, steal his passport, leave out of his tires or sue him so he has to stay inside the country, cut his credit card, send him into the wrong direction so he ends up in the mountains/desert.

If you dont do it for Germany then at least do it for the good relation between Germany and the US.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 20 2002,22:51)</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">Do you guys think saddam has chemical weapons ? If you say yes,do you think he's going let inspectors see them ?

If you say no,that he doesn't have chemical weapon,you should see what he did to his sons-in-laws,when they gave out the truth.

I truly don't know understand anyones  point though.You don't want the U.S. to bomb,ok,But why not ? Because a few thousands civilians will die ? I hate to tell you but those few are dying now,because of sanctions.But i don't agree on attacking iraq,i believe they need to find saddam,someway,somehow and just bomb him.Also bomb all his palaces,he has 20 of them.

<span id='postcolor'>

1) Regardless if he has or has not chemical weapons, it is not a reason to bomb him. He hasn't done anything. Should we bomb the USA because they have WMD?

2) Why is is bad to bomb Iraq?

[*] Civilian deaths

[*] Allied deaths

[*] Increased oil prices

[*] Precedence for other countries to bomb anybody that might in the future be a threat of them

[*] Pointless - Saddam poses no threat to the world

[*] You will fuck up the Israel/Palestine question even more

[*] Alienation of the islamic/arab nations

[*] Market instability<span id='postcolor'>

[*] And legalising war as a political action and turning the UN into a war-syndicate!

[edc 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Saddam poses no threat to the world<span id='postcolor'>

How can you possible say that Saddam poses no threat to the world.  He may not be a threat to you Europeans who aren't large targets of terrorism, and are too far away from Iraq to be hit w/ a missile-but to a large portion of the rest of the world-trust me-he is a threat.  

Do you actually think think that Saddam is going to have his nuclear research facilities right out in the open with 'this is a nuclear research facility' on top.  They are not going to be easy to find.

He might of used napalm too, but he DID use chemical weapons on them.  I've read it in books and here is some stuff on the internet.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Personally, I wish Hussein would meet his demise, given his human rights record, totalitarian regime & the use of chemical weapons against helpless Khurds<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">by absorbing crucial resources that could have used for growing food and delivering water to the children of Iraq, he deliberately destroyed parts of his own society the same way he used Chemical Warfare on the Khurds.  

<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You see Bush is a moron.<span id='postcolor'>

I think you accidently put Bush where you should have put your name.

Also Saddam supports terrorism.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Sep. 20 2002,23:28)</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">Saddam poses no threat to the world<span id='postcolor'>

How can you possible say that Saddam poses no threat to the world.  He may not be a threat to you Europeans who aren't large targets of terrorism, and are too far away from Iraq to be hit w/ a missile-but to a large portion of the rest of the world-trust me-he is a threat.   <span id='postcolor'>

Lol. You need to read up on two things: Geography and History.

1) Europe is much closer to Iraq then America is

2) Europe has had it share of terrorism; far more then USA ever has.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Do you actually think think that Saddam is going to have his nuclear research facilities right out in the open with 'this is a nuclear research facility' on top.  They are not going to be easy to find.

<span id='postcolor'>

So you thinking that he might have nuclear capabilities makes it a fact ?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">He might of used napalm too, but he DID use chemical weapons on them.  I've read it in books and here is some stuff on the internet.

<span id='postcolor'>

References?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also Saddam supports terrorism.<span id='postcolor'>

Yet to be proven. USA and Britain have failed so far to find any proof of that.

Can't you see how your (and Bush's) case against Iraq is all built up on assumptions without any hard evidence?

[edc 0]

No I don't think he has nukes at this time. But I KNOW that he is developing them.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Sep. 20 2002,23:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No I don't think he has nukes at this time.  But I KNOW that he is developing them.<span id='postcolor'>

How do you KNOW that? USA has been trying to prove that for quite some time now, without any success. Do you perhaps know something that the CIA doesnt?

[edc 0]

Heres a nice reference for ya!

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/cw/program.htm