Killing sadam

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

Why are pople making a big deal about assanating Sadam? It could save lives, and bombing him is the same thing. What is so wrong with using 1 bullet?? It is not like Sadam would not do the same to any one of us if he cared or wanted too.

[COW 0]

I think we should take him out. He has bean nothing but a thrett and a pain in the Arss for my contry,the US and the UN. Take him OUT!

[Cloney 0]

Political Assassination isn't a policy of the American Government. (Atleast not officially)

[Balschoiw 0]

...cause we don´t live in "Crazy Horse Town" where cowboys are duelling on the streets. We talk about the leader of a nation here. Hm, maybe they used the same arguments to kill Kennedy ?

Serious now, Irak is a souvereign country, Saddam is their leader. There are certain rules on how countries have to be respected even if they dont fit into our view of sight. There is still NO prove, that Saddam has ABC weapons. That´s fact. Even Bush, who speaks of evidence from day 1 of this discussion has not made any prove public. Why ? I guess there is none. Even former Iraki weapon inspectors doubt the US/British theories on ABC weapon programs in Irak.

Therefore we have the UN now. The UN has the task to find out wether he has ABC weapons oir facilities to produce them or not. Noone else on this planet can slip into these shoes.

If the US think they can do that on their own, the´re wrong and break international law. I guess also in the USA you got to have prove before you can sue someone.

If the US should start a Solo - Ride it would be the worst developement after WW2. Why ?

Cause any leader of any country can be accused with unproven things and eliminated right away.

By the way - if there was prove against Saddam, why don´t they sue him on International court in Den Haag ?

I wonder what the real motivation is behind the current developements regarding Irak, but I guess a permanent US presence to secure Oil - Ways and sources maybe a reason.

Why don´t US attack Pakistan or India. They already have ABC weapons and they were more than one time close to use them. Ah I forgot... US cant bomb Pakistan, cause there are a lot of CIA guys that aid Taliban Soldiers to bring up their second career as Drug - farmers.

[COW 0]

As much as I and many other people would like to just go in and take him out it would not make a good impression on the UN. which would be bad. And that Sucks.

[Badgerboy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think we should take him out. He has bean nothing but a thrett and a pain in the Arss for my contry,the US and the UN. Take him OUT! <span id='postcolor'>

'The problem with Democracy, is that every stupid bastard gets a vote!'

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ Oct. 03 2002,01:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why are pople making a big deal about assanating Sadam? It could save lives, and bombing him is the same thing. What is so wrong with using 1 bullet??  It is not like Sadam would not do the same to any one of us if he cared or wanted too.<span id='postcolor'>

Bush killed 5000 people in Afghanistan, lets kill him

@ this thread

I'm not gonna close this, as there's hope it might not turn into a mudfight, but I doubt it...but I'm ready to be surprised...

My comment on this:

Good night

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

You feeling alright buddy?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...cause we don´t live in "Crazy Horse Town" where cowboys are duelling on the streets. We talk about the leader of a nation here. Hm, maybe they used the same arguments to kill Kennedy ?

Serious now, Irak is a souvereign country, Saddam is their leader. There are certain rules on how countries have to be respected even if they dont fit into our view of sight. <span id='postcolor'>

You might not have noticed, but the enemy usually does not go by the rules, but rules for war? The only people who get punished are the loosers.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">good impression on the UN. which would be bad. <span id='postcolor'>

Bahhh. If the U.N. does not like it to bad.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bush killed 5000 people in Afghanistan, lets kill him

<span id='postcolor'>

So we should kill all the soldeirs of wars who killed innocent civilians? Its part of war, it is not as if we do this on purpose, and as for Kosovo it is a place we did not belong.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Assassinating Saddam isn't going to help anything. Why?

A: It will serve to destabilize the country to the point of a civil war. I mean, he has been their leader for almost 30 years now- that means there is a whole new generation of Iraquis that have known no leadership other than Hussein. And civil wars in countries that have weapons of mass destruction is something to be avoided. The only way to avoid this would be to invade, and then we are back at step one.

B: Assassinating a man who is as paranoid as Saddam is a whole lot easier said than done. Saddam hasn't stayed alive and in power for so long because his government and military love him, he's stayed alive by ruthlessly weeding out anyone disloyal to him. That is not the easiest environment to recruit assassins in.

C: Assassination is not the way the good guys are supposed to deal with the bad guys, and it is vitally important that we maintain the moral high ground in this fight, otherwise who is the victim, and who is the ruthless aggressor?

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">C: Assassination is not the way the good guys are supposed to deal with the bad guys, and it is vitally important that we maintain the moral high ground in this fight, otherwise who is the victim, and who is the ruthless aggressor?<span id='postcolor'>

lol Killing Sadam with a bullet would be immoral? So if we killed him with bombs it is ok?? Either way is fine, you have to get the job done, and the cheapest and less coslty of lives way is the best.

[Balschoiw 0]

Saddam did not start a war this time. It is Bush who wants to do that.

I really wonder how some people define "Freedom" and "Democracy" nowadays. If i go out and kill a guy on the streets i am a murder. So is anybody that orders to do that.

I don´t say Saddam is a good guy, but that gives me no right to kill him. Neither has Mr. Bush the right to. Saddam is a case for international courts and not for a bullet. I really wonder how easy it is since 9.11 to blow away all our democratic achievements like courts, and international law.

[billytran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Oct. 03 2002,02:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bush killed 5000 people in Afghanistan, lets kill him <span id='postcolor'>

No he didn't, those studies (and I use that term loosely) were based on articles in Indian and Pakistani newspapers. More accurate studies, using information gathered from the actual sites in Afghanistan, show that the death toll was much lower.

Back on the subject, though... I think the arms inspections will be ineffective. They've already negotiated to have Saddam's presidential palaces placed off-limits to the inspectors. Just like last time, the inspectors will be denied access to military bases because they're "presidential palaces."

[Tex -USMC- 0]

You don't get it. Assassination is just not what America is supposed to do. It's not a question of cost effectiveness, it's a question of morals- they tought you morals at church, right Duke? I don't care if he's an evil guy, that doesn't give us license to be evil also. If we want to be the good guys, we have to ACT like good guys.

[COW 0]

I think that we should go with the arms inspections but have our men ready to fight if Iraq doesn't do what they say. I also think they should let arms inspectors in the palaces because there is no telling what could be hidden in there.

[second_draw 0]

What is bush offering to get blair & howard wanting badly to attack saddam? Sadam seems so far to be playing along. You can always bomb him later.

[edc 0]

I think we would send Spec. Ops. in if we ever knew for sure where he was.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If i go out and kill a guy on the streets i am a murder<span id='postcolor'>

So your saying if you kill someone thats murdered hundreds if not thousands of innocent people on purpose it is wrong to kill him? I fail to see any logic in that.

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

For the UN to decide something as trivial as what color of socks they should wear they would probably have to have to have a 2 year long discussion.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There is still NO prove, that Saddam has ABC weapons<span id='postcolor'>

First its NBC not ABC and second heres just a few of the god only knows how many links I posted on a previous topic saying that he has Chem. and Bio. weapons:

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

http://www.nci.org/s/sad-new-bomb-st-122400.htm

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/2002/030502iraq.htm

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/2001/02/iraq-010202b.htm

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If the US think they can do that on their own, the´re wrong and break international law<span id='postcolor'>

Saddam has broken resolutions which allow the use of force if he does not follor them. And what international law says you have to have permission before you start a war??

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Oct. 03 2002,03:00)</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">There is still NO prove, that Saddam has ABC weapons<span id='postcolor'>

First its NBC not ABC and second heres just a few of the god only knows how many links I posted on a previous topic saying that he has Chem. and Bio. weapons:

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

http://www.nci.org/s/sad-new-bomb-st-122400.htm

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/2002/030502iraq.htm

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/2001/02/iraq-010202b.htm<span id='postcolor'>

Back off mate, there is more than one language out there, not everyone speaks English as his/her first language, some people tend to speak different languages, believe it or not

And guess what, your beloved weapons of mass destruction are not called NBC weapons everywhere, some call them differently

Yes, some actually call them ABC weapons

[Major Fubar 0]

OK, I'll bite.

Who died and made the USA the worlds policy maker? So every time a leaders isn't inline with America's policies, it's OK to assassinate them? And bomb the crap out of their country? And when did Bush become the policy maker of the UN?

Bush is still smarting because he didn't get revenge on Usama for S11, and needs a nasty Arab type to take it out on. Period.

Don't give me this "weapons of destruction" crap. Bush wants war. The more Saddam yields to demands, the further Bush pushes him, hoping for a confrontation. Isn't it ironic that the worlds largest repository of weapons of mass destruction is America, who, coincidentally, is also the only country to have used nuclear weapons on foreign countries. Remind me how many people died in Hiroshima again?

Fact is, Bush won't feel happy until he's dragged the world into WW III, his constant aggression will unite the Muslim countries of the world against America, and all the poor, stupid countries who have chosen to be it's allies.

Anyway, flame away, but that's my opinion.

[edc 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And guess what, your beloved weapons of mass destruction are not called NBC weapons everywhere, some call them differently <span id='postcolor'>

OK, sorry, but I've never ever heard them called ABC.

Major Fubar I won't even comment on what you said because I would probably use some words and stuff that would get me banned.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Oct. 03 2002,03:18)</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">And guess what, your beloved weapons of mass destruction are not called NBC weapons everywhere, some call them differently <span id='postcolor'>

OK, sorry, but I've never ever heard them called ABC.

Major Fubar I won't even comment on what you said because I would probably use some words and stuff that would get me banned.<span id='postcolor'>

ABC: In german: Atomar, Biologisch, Chemisch

In Greek, it would be <span style='font-family:symbol'>PBC</span> <span style='font-family:symbol'>Pirinika, Biologika, Cemika</span>

[edc 0]

That'd probably be the reason since people don't usually talk in a foreign language over here.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Oct. 03 2002,03:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That'd probably be the reason since people don't usually talk in a foreign language over here. <span id='postcolor'>

LMAO

[COW 0]

Major Fubar some of us do live in Amarica and other allied contries that doesn't mean we all agree with Bush but people are easly offended if negetive things are said about their contries so just keep that in minde. also Lets not get into a war online people.

[second_draw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (billytran @ Oct. 03 2002,02:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Oct. 03 2002,02:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bush killed 5000 people in Afghanistan, lets kill him <span id='postcolor'>

No he didn't, those studies (and I use that term loosely) were based on articles in Indian and Pakistani newspapers.  More accurate studies, using information gathered from the actual sites in Afghanistan, show that the death toll was much lower.

Back on the subject, though... I think the arms inspections will be ineffective.  They've already negotiated to have Saddam's presidential palaces placed off-limits to the inspectors.  Just like last time, the inspectors will be denied access to military bases because they're "presidential palaces."<span id='postcolor'>

have you heard of murphy's law of combat

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Body count Math: 3 guerrillas plus 1 probable plus 2 pigs equals 37 enemies killed in action. <span id='postcolor'>

[Jester983 0]

Okay im not a person who is into politics so bear with me here.

Personally, I think it might be a good idea to get rid of saddam. I would just fear that he could launch a nuke at either europe or america.

Now for those of you guys who say "bush wanted Iraq to let the weapons inspectors in, and he got that, so he should call off the war."

I think thats total bullshit. I mean hes just going to do the same thing as he did last time the weapon inspectors were there.

Saddamn: "Okay you can go there, there and there but you cant go there. Thats my Bomb factory."

I mean think about it.

Now someone in here is probably going to come along and call me a complete moron. Which I understand because im not into politics. But I just had to put in a little bit of my own input.

Hope you respect that. If you dont like it. Too bad!