The Iraq Thread

[OxPecker 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Feb. 12 2003,02:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Feb. 12 2003,07:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Millions or billions? Jeebus, has Saddam built a Deathstar?

In short, yes, I am willing to take that risk, since I think it is a very small one. At least until more solid evidence is produced of what WMD Iraq has, that is my opinion.<span id='postcolor'>

And like I've said before, if all the evidence that has been produced doesn't convince you, nothing short of a nuclear bomb will.<span id='postcolor'>

No, it wouldnt take a nuclear bomb to convince me, but something better than extremely questionable phone tapes, dodgy aerial shots, and the testimony of biased defectors is required.

[OxPecker 0]

From E6Hotel's source about the warning of Japan about the A-bombs:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Within a few days, the United States Army Air Force will bomb military facilities located in a few cities; all of these cities are written on the back of this paper.<span id='postcolor'>

Doesn't quite equate to: "We are going to blow 2 cities to kingdom come with weapons of destruction never seen before, and render these cities uninhabitable for years".

So if Iraq dropped propoganda leaflets (which is what these were) on a country before using WMD on it, then would it all be honky dory?

Anyway, my whole point is that you don't have to advertise your weapons for them to be defensive. FSPilot was trying to prove that Iraq could only have WMD for attack puropses, which I disagree with. (Heck, I disagree that Iraq even has a significant number of these things anyway). I wasn't trying to drag up the a-bomb topic again, but to make a point about aggressive vs. defensive weapons.

I don't know how many times I have to say this: US should wait foir the UN, and UN should wait until real evidence is found. Do Americans seriously belive Iraq is a real threat to them? How could any intelligent person believe that with the evidence at hand.

[bn880 5]

You know FSPilot, one day, maybe not too far away, you will see that going in is not such a good idea. You could never believe that now but the time may be coming. Just think about the possibility that the world situation will change completely resulting from this attack, and your life will also be impacted. What if Saddam doesn't actually have the serious weapons, and what if he really is not a threat anymore...

I'v had a moment or two where I looked back at something I believed in, and realized my accusations or beliefs were wrong. That's why if I have a problem with any one or any policy, I try to go over the situation once in a while if I can remember to.

Let yourself think about this from the other point of view, if you can.

[DracoPaladore 0]

IF the United States decided to attack without permission from either NATO or the UN, woulden't that be breaking international law?

I'm curious, what will the breaking of that law actually do? Punishment? A slap on the wrist?

[Akira 0]

48 Hours To Kill Saddam

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Feb. 12 2003,08:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Those times have long gone - and when Iraq did those things (during the war against Iran) it was on the right side, meaning these were good deeds, highly appreciated and supported by the US governement.<span id='postcolor'>

So why is it still developing WMDs?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No, it wouldnt take a nuclear bomb to convince me, but something better than extremely questionable phone tapes, dodgy aerial shots, and the testimony of biased defectors is required.<span id='postcolor'>

And you expect Saddam to just lay out his weapons in the open and tell everyone what he did to those that he had in 1998?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You know FSPilot, one day, maybe not too far away, you will see that going in is not such a good idea. You could never believe that now but the time may be coming. Just think about the possibility that the world situation will change completely resulting from this attack, and your life will also be impacted. What if Saddam doesn't actually have the serious weapons, and what if he really is not a threat anymore...<span id='postcolor'>

And what if Saddam does actually have these serious weapons, and what if he really is a threat to everyone on this planet. What if he's already handed them to a terrorist. What if he's got them in a suitcase on their way to Israel as we speak.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'v had a moment or two where I looked back at something I believed in, and realized my accusations or beliefs were wrong. That's why if I have a problem with any one or any policy, I try to go over the situation once in a while if I can remember to.<span id='postcolor'>

So you're saying that everyone is going to change their opinion in time because you did it once or twice? When's your turn then?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let yourself think about this from the other point of view, if you can. <span id='postcolor'>

That's why I'm here. All I've seen from your sides arguments are baseless accusations and speculation. What I've seen from my side is good evidence, and more speculation.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Feb. 11 2003,21:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And what if Saddam does actually have these serious weapons, and what if he really is a threat to everyone on this planet. What if he's already handed them to a terrorist. What if he's got them in a suitcase on their way to Israel as we speak.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, I wonder about things like that also, I did look at it from the other sides point of view, but I wouldn't be this paranoid. Anyway, jsut because of the Israeli state you can't dominate hte whole world by stopping it from having a problem with Israel itself. Or at leas i don't think it's going to lead to anything good.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So you're saying that everyone is going to change their opinion in time because you did it once or twice? When's your turn then?

<span id='postcolor'>

No exactly. What I'm saying is everyone is bound to come across this if they are fortunate enough to ever find out the "truth"... or at least the other side. I'm thinking maybe this iwll happen to you with this conflict right now. It would be ironic to say the least, unfortunately we may never find out.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </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">Let yourself think about this from the other point of view, if you can. <span id='postcolor'>

That's why I'm here. All I've seen from your sides arguments are baseless accusations and speculation. What I've seen from my side is good evidence, and more speculation.<span id='postcolor'> Well that's good, I'm just telling you what my experience is, don't lose connection with the other side 100%. In the end it's our choice.

I'll be honest with you again, the way you argue (or debate), and the whole reasoning/logic behind the U.S. case doesn't add up for me. I just can't believe any of the reasons are viable for a brutal war to ensue. If you will excuse me, I want to watch M*A*S*H and feed myself now.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Feb. 12 2003,09:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, I wonder about things like that also, I did look at it from the other sides point of view, but I wouldn't be this paranoid. Anyway, jsut because of the Israeli state you can't dominate hte whole world by stopping it from having a problem with Israel itself. Or at leas i don't think it's going to lead to anything good.<span id='postcolor'>

I was just using Israel as an example.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No exactly. What I'm saying is everyone is bound to come across this if they are fortunate enough to ever find out the "truth"... or at least the other side. I'm thinking maybe this iwll happen to you with this conflict right now. It would be ironic to say the least, unfortunately we may never find out. <span id='postcolor'>

Well, now I'm thinking maybe it will happen to you.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'll be honest with you again, the way you argue (or debate), and the whole reasoning/logic behind the U.S. case doesn't add up for me. I just can't believe any of the reasons are viable for a brutal war to ensue. If you will excuse me, I want to watch M*A*S*H and feed myself now. <span id='postcolor'>

Maybe because we simply dont regard each other's facts as true? I don't know.

[5thSFG.CNUTZ 0]

Just a question, did NATO have UN Mandate to go and bomb in Yugoslavia?  If so, can you provide links for me?  I have read some sites that say NATO did not have it.  If this is true, did NATO break international law?

[Akira 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (5thSFG.CNUTZ @ Feb. 12 2003,04:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just a question, did NATO have UN Mandate to go and bomb in Yugoslavia?  If so, can you provide links for me?  I have read some sites that say NATO did not have it.  If this is true, did NATO break international law?<span id='postcolor'>

Security Council Endorses K-FOR

But you will also notice they endorsed it AFTER the bombing began.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> However, China remains troubled by NATO's actions and NATO's domination of what is now K-FOR, the UN sanctioned peace operation in Kosovo, even though China acquiesced by not vetoing the Security Council resolution.<span id='postcolor'>

EDIT: My bad...looks like K-FOR was UN sanctioned.

[OxPecker 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Feb. 12 2003,03:49)</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">No, it wouldnt take a nuclear bomb to convince me, but something better than extremely questionable phone tapes, dodgy aerial shots, and the testimony of biased defectors is required.<span id='postcolor'>

1. And you expect Saddam to just lay out his weapons in the open and tell everyone what he did to those that he had in 1998?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You know FSPilot, one day, maybe not too far away, you will see that going in is not such a good idea.  You could never believe that now but the time may be coming.  Just think about the possibility that the world situation will change completely resulting from this attack, and your life will also be impacted.  What if Saddam doesn't actually have the serious weapons, and what if he really is not a threat anymore...<span id='postcolor'>

2. And what if Saddam does actually have these serious weapons, and what if he really is a threat to everyone on this planet.  What if he's already handed them to a terrorist.  What if he's got them in a suitcase on their way to Israel as we speak.<span id='postcolor'>

1. Are you seriously telling me that that half-assed crap Colin Powel served up was the best that the almighty US intelligence agencies could produce, if Saddam really is hoarding WMD? Please, gimme a break. Either the CIA and NSA are totally useless, or maybe, just maybe, Saddam isn't stockpiling these weapons.

2. Is that a personal best on the numbers of "ifs" and amount of speculation in one post?

What if Georgw W conqures Iraq, and what if he annexes it as a new state, and what if he starts a new era of crusades to reclaim the holy land, and what if this triggers WW3

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Feb. 12 2003,02:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Feb. 12 2003,02:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">On a related note, did the US tell Japan about the first atomic bombs before they dropped them? No, but they were still classified as defensive weapons, to end a war.<span id='postcolor'>

Since you brought it up...

Thought the Hiroshima and Nagasaki discussion had been beat to death already.  At any rate, I don't think anyone in their right mind has ever considered the a-bombs "defensive" weapons.

Semper Fi<span id='postcolor'>

Funny...I dont see either Nagasaki or Hiroshima on that list of cities...

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Akira @ Feb. 12 2003,05:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (5thSFG.CNUTZ @ Feb. 12 2003,04:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just a question, did NATO have UN Mandate to go and bomb in Yugoslavia?  If so, can you provide links for me?  I have read some sites that say NATO did not have it.  If this is true, did NATO break international law?<span id='postcolor'>

Security Council Endorses K-FOR

But you will also notice they endorsed it AFTER the bombing began.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> However, China remains troubled by NATO's actions and NATO's domination of what is now K-FOR, the UN sanctioned peace operation in Kosovo, even though China acquiesced by not vetoing the Security Council resolution.<span id='postcolor'>

EDIT: My bad...looks like K-FOR was UN sanctioned.<span id='postcolor'>

Do not confuse KFOR and NATO. KFOR is UN endorsed. NATO/US bombings were not, at least not directly through a vote.

NATO was enforcing UN resolutions but they did not get a permission to start the bombing. Later, when Yugoslavia surrendered, KFOR got UN endorsement to take care of post-war Kosovo.

[Major Fubar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Feb. 12 2003,06:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What if Georgw W conqures Iraq, and what if he annexes it as a new state, and what if he starts a new era of crusades to reclaim the holy land, and what if this triggers WW3  <span id='postcolor'>

You forgot the next logical step: a race of intelligent apes rise after WW3, and enslave mankind!

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Feb. 12 2003,07:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">and what if he starts a new era of crusades to reclaim the holy land<span id='postcolor'>

We shall fill the River Jordan with tehina. A worse death than quicksand!

[FallenPaladin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Feb. 12 2003,08:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Feb. 12 2003,06:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What if Georgw W conqures Iraq, and what if he annexes it as a new state, and what if he starts a new era of crusades to reclaim the holy land, and what if this triggers WW3  <span id='postcolor'>

You forgot the next logical step: a race of intelligent apes rise after WW3, and enslave mankind!  <span id='postcolor'>

You understood the evil masterplan! Compare Pres. Bush and the apes, there are websites...

He`s the first of what there is to come

[Blaegis 0]

I dunno if this has been previously posted, but it's pretty damn funny.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Blaegis @ Feb. 12 2003,20:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dunno if this has been previously posted, but it's pretty damn funny.<span id='postcolor'>

It has been posted before, but it is still funny.

The unfortunate thing, is that no matter how innocent it looks, it does have truth in it. It demonstrates just how unstable the region is, and how stirring up the Middle East could have undersirable side affects.

What was almost as funny (in a dark way) was George Bush claiming that the new Osama Bin Laden tape proves that Hussien and Bin Laden are connected just becuase Bin Laden said America would be in his bad books if they bombed Iraq and the Iraqi people should fight the Americans. It's not like he said 'Hussien and I are in an unholy alliance'.

[DarkLight 0]

As i thought before, Bush's great idea to revenge daddy is gonna be a complete disaster... Do i hear anyone say Vietnam?

No doubt about it, the Iraqi people are strongly underestimated, i guess it'll take a while before all the American mothers realize that their suns actually die. With some luck the same will happen as in Vietnam and the whole thing will be over as soon as they show the dead bodies and torn off body parts on TV...

Now our good friend Bin Laden asks the East to defend against the Evil West, i bet some of you people think this: "What? They don't like the West? But the way we live is the one and only good way? And Saddam's a dictator!!!"

Ahha, yet again, no one realizes that the East hates the West, and they especially hate America.

Don't fucking call me a basher, go to your momma and cry there, it's just the way it is!

For some reason a lot of people seem to think that the East is waiting for the West to invade... Funny, after all this time you guys should at least realize that they might not like us a lot overthere...

But as i said, Bin Laden asks the world to defend against teh evil West, AQ tells Iraq that they are prepared to fight with Iraq against America.

Now suddenly everybody screams like little kids "SEE, SEE!!! I told you guys AQ have connections with Iraq!!"

There's only one fucking connection and that's that they both hate the US.

AQ doesn't like Iraq because Iraq isn't religious enough, but still the AQ are prepared to fight together with Iraq.

No doubt about it, many countries will be prepared to fight America, after all, everyone's sick of the American Government playing the cop of the world.

Soon enough, we'll all be very worry that we started this...

ps: Don't call me a basher, look the truth in the eyes instead of running away from it.

[mr. Duck 0]

Dark, wasn't old man Bush himself against this? Didn't he advised against a war with saddam?

By the way I doubt if the iraqi military could defeat the us. Yes the us will get casaulties on this war and maybe even more then in the last one but I don't think it will be a vietnam. But hey, you'll never know, the world is full off suprises these last days, who knows, maybe europe is going to be a superpower again!

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (mr. Duck @ Feb. 11 2003,14:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Dark, wasn't old man Bush himself against this? Didn't he advised against a war with saddam?

By the way I doubt if the iraqi military could defeat the us. Yes the us will get casaulties on this war and maybe even more then in the last one but I don't think it will be a vietnam. But hey, you'll never know, the world is full off suprises these last days, who knows, maybe europe is going to be a superpower again!   <span id='postcolor'>

Hehehe who knows...

Maybe the Iraqi people can't defeat the US army but the chance exists that other countries will want to fight too...

Dunno if Bush was against it or not...

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Blaegis @ Feb. 12 2003,12:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dunno if this has been previously posted, but it's pretty damn funny.<span id='postcolor'>

LOL. That's hilarious!

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (mr. Duck @ Feb. 12 2003,13:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But hey, you'll never know, the world is full off suprises these last days, who knows, maybe europe is going to be a superpower again!   <span id='postcolor'>

It depends how you define superpower. There are two million troops in uniform in Europe, half a million more than the Americans. We can caugh up at least four times that number since a lot of European countries have a conscription based military. We have more aircafts, tanks. We have aircraft carriers and nukes.

...the thing is only that Europe is not coherent. It's in that way very different from the US. I don't think we are going to see the unified creation of the European Defense Forces any time soon. The Iraq crisis has shown just how fragile the EU foregin policy is. It obviously didn't pass the test.

If we join forces properly in the future, the sum will be considerably stronger then the US military. Europe does not have any superpower ambitions.. been there done that

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Feb. 12 2003,02:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Feb. 12 2003,02:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">On a related note, did the US tell Japan about the first atomic bombs before they dropped them? No, but they were still classified as defensive weapons, to end a war.<span id='postcolor'>

Since you brought it up...<span id='postcolor'>

Thanks for posting the interesting leaflet.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...With your assistance, the humanitarian America doesn't want to hurt innocent people, so please evacuate the cities written on the reverse side of this paper.

...

Maybe cities other than those written on the back of this paper will be bombed, but at least those few cities on the back of this paper will certainly be bombed.

To reiterate our previous warning--please evacuate the cities written on the back of this paper.

Cities listed on the back:  Nagano, Takaoka, Kurume, Fukuyama, Toyama, Maizuru, Otsu, Nishinomiya, Maebashi, Suido, Hachioji, Koriyama<span id='postcolor'>

I've often wondered why Hiroshima and Nagasaki were so full of refugees, perhaps seeking shelter there because they were not on the list (not to mention their lack of war industry).

[Die Alive 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Feb. 12 2003,08:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thanks for posting the interesting leaflet.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...With your assistance, the humanitarian America doesn't want to hurt innocent people, so please evacuate the cities written on the reverse side of this paper.

...

Maybe cities other than those written on the back of this paper will be bombed, but at least those few cities on the back of this paper will certainly be bombed.

To reiterate our previous warning--please evacuate the cities written on the back of this paper.

Cities listed on the back:  Nagano, Takaoka, Kurume, Fukuyama, Toyama, Maizuru, Otsu, Nishinomiya, Maebashi, Suido, Hachioji, Koriyama<span id='postcolor'>

I've often wondered why Hiroshima and Nagasaki were so full of refugees, perhaps seeking shelter there because they were not on the list (not to mention their lack of war industry).<span id='postcolor'>

And are nagasaki and Hiroshima said they wouldn't be bombed at all?

-=Die Alive=-