View Full Version : War with Iraq?
Is force the the right answer?
I'm not certain it is - for me, diplomacy is the way ahead in this modern age.
diplomacy only works with cooperation from the other party.
so i think the only way forward is "YES"
just my 2p's worth tho.. no doubt there will be strong arguments against..
Should have gone all the way last time, you cant reason with a tyrant like Saddam
I suspect this is one of those occasions where we're damned either way, so we might as well get stuck in there first :(
sroberts
04-01-2003, 20:18
Don't worry about Iraq, personally I'd be a bit more concerned about North Korea :(
SI :)
Originally posted by sroberts
Don't worry about Iraq, personally I'd be a bit more concerned about North Korea :(
SI :)
I think they're just manoevering for position to get the USA to ease sanctions against them. Posturing a bit over nuclear missiles at a time when the USA has other fish to fry might just get them what they want.
Originally posted by Blue
Should have gone all the way last time, you cant reason with a tyrant like Saddam
Esp when he was installed by the CIA anyway
Anyway, I did NOT vote for Bush, so why the hell should i go to war for him?
Mr_Sukebe
04-01-2003, 21:01
What I don't understand is why they need war. Why not just assassinate him?
Lets face it, they don't seem to have a problem with the "civilians" or even the normal troops. So why bother getting our guys into a situation where they might get killed, when a single assassin can do it?
sroberts
04-01-2003, 21:03
Did anyone see that program about his doubles? They had some swiss expert how proved that last time Tony Blair was in iraq, talking to Saddam... it wasn't even him just one of his doubles :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
Si :)
tim rome
04-01-2003, 21:14
i am more concerned about the mental stability of George W Bush than i am about iraq or korea. This person could bring about a third world war if we are not careful and he didnt exactly win the election by a land slide, i am not sure how many hundreds of millions of people are in the USA but to only win an election by a few hundred votes in a state that is run by his brother ???? scary.
would be interested to hear what NISMO FREAK has to say about this, being there and all.
Originally posted by Mr_Sukebe
What I don't understand is why they need war. Why not just assassinate him?
Lets face it, they don't seem to have a problem with the "civilians" or even the normal troops. So why bother getting our guys into a situation where they might get killed, when a single assassin can do it?
Because you can not kill a martyr
NissanNewbie
04-01-2003, 21:37
but worrying mostly cos i`ll probably end up out there, Looks like he is gonna follow the same route he tried last time and go after israel, this is the course of action most of the muslim states would take and with the US under pressure from the UN to reign in israel over the palastine situation israel may just decide aww bugger it and start sending over tactical nukes, which will cause all the other muslim states to rally around iraq (ignoring previous disagreements) could be looking at a major war in the middle east if that happens.
North Korea situation is nothing more than a bit of chest beating they do it everytime things don`t go there way so wouldn`t worry about it too much, india and pakistan do a similar thing around the same time every year. The chinese have the koreans in check so i wouldn`t worry to much about that as there are no sanctions in place on china at the minute.
As for the single assasin idea, apart from the fact they you would turn him into a martyr, you might not take him out but one of his doubles instead there is also the major point that his nephew and his generals are more fanatical than him believe it or not. The americans want a democratically elected government for iraq (meaning one they approve of basically)
Papa Lazarou
04-01-2003, 23:55
Originally posted by tim rome
i am more concerned about the mental stability of George W Bush than i am about iraq or korea.
I'm sure he's mentally stable. Just thick as s**t :) They'd be better off with "some bloke from the pub" running the country.
I think an attack on Iraq is not the best course of action. Last time, yes - it was the only thing we could do really and the world largely supported it. Now, I'm really not so sure.
Hopefully the Korea thing won't escalate any further otherwise we'll have some real problems..
Nismo_Freak
05-01-2003, 07:19
Honestly I have no idea on this one... obviously there are two sides to the war. By us rushing in there and doing a regime change and all that mess we really havent changed the dynamic power withen Iraq. Iraqi miliatants will go underground much like the Islamic groups withen Pakistan and Afghanistan did following the Russian's invasions. However if Saddam is plotting to create weapons of mass destruction for these extremist groups then by all means we need to eradicate them before they are allowed to use them. I honestly dont think that usage of UK troops is in the interest of the UK. Tony Blair seems to be a lap dog for Bush. And before we go on talking about Bush lets not forget who has dispached more troops in US HISTORY (INCLUDING WWII), Bill Clinton. His incursions into Somalia led to the death of several US personel. I remember hearing the news talk of US troops in Haiti that where being shot at... but couldnt shoot back, few wounded there. Frankly the US needed a President with some balls, Al "Gutless" Gore wouldnt have done crap. Most of this George Bush crap extends from the Liberal Media withen the US and their bias towards the Democratic party, they are owned by a devoted Communist (Ted Turner) whom I personally dont like. Either way war is the only way I can see Iraq complying to anyones rules. Colin Powell was the reason we where held back from completing the job last time... perhaps he will try it again. However I dont think Bush Jr. is gonna let it happen. Keep in mind the reason we are in this Middle East crap in the first place. Back when the Iron Curtain was up we, the US & UK, sided with Israel as they where the "oasis" amongst the desert of Communist Regimes in the area. This friction with the neighboring countries instilled a sense of hatred and spite against the West. The fact that Israeli troops use US funded weapons to kill Palestinians in their own homeland doesnt help the effort either. All this bull**** about Israeli oppression from the Arabs is the largest crock I've heard. Israelis have persecuted the Arabs since they arrived in the "Exodus" in the late 40s and into the 50s. Their oppressive tactics and the extreme use of force to enforce policies that border international law violations no doubtingly created the Arab militant insurgents. And for us to say poor Israel is to be ignorant. Frankly I think the war against Iraq is a 50/50 call... IF they had capability to create these weapons then we need to dismantle their capability and source their connections. Bombing a war-torn and terrorized nation again and invading it will only create a smaller less managable pocket of hatred.
I think the use of force will be unfounded as there is no evidence that SH has any WMD. I think a lot of ppl have views on this this that are very different from my own, when they talk about "we", but you are not the ppl who are being sent out there to fight a war you do not agree with. If however the UN send forces out there then there will be good reason to be there. Knowing what President Bush and Vice President Blair are like they will manipulate statistics to try to put across a good excuse to go to war. There is only one reason the Americans want to invade and that is to line there own pockets. If this does happen without the UN's approval the world is going to end up a really sh1tty place very soon with even more terrorist activity. All that really needs to happen is to educate the muslim communities from an early age that there is more than one religion in the world and that ppl believe in different things and have different values. I have to look on the bright side, at least I'll come back with a quality tan. Well around my eyes anyway where the sun can penetrate through my respirator lenses. Operation Certain Death sounds like a winner to me NOT!!! If only I was a fire fighter.
Jezz_S13
05-01-2003, 10:25
There shouldn't be a war, unless as Richie says the UN find reason to validate it; Rather than Bush wanting to go one better than his old man with Blair wanting to lick his ****.
Things will happen as a knock on of this war should it happen in the way it looks like it will, nieghbour countries will start fighting again due to some allowing allied forces to use bases and fly from them, while others condemn it.
India Vs Pakistan looks a bit volatile, face it it's all a bit volatile around there, and the last thing people of those nations need is some remote **** hole and his buddy sparking off WW3.
As said before, Korea is looking like a possible time bomb, as is Yemen, isreal as usual, more al qaeda attacks. It's all terribly grim, and Bush & his little helper have stirred the majority of it up.
And on the same sentiment as Richie not wanting to fight a war he doesn't believe in, I don't want me, my family, friends anyone to be a victim of terrorist attacks due to the fact that 'we' support the US and there game of world domination. I am NOT part of that 'we', neither are most of the population I hope.
Perhaps I'm a bit paranoid/pessimistic but i believe that our lives are gonna be ****ed up if this does all kick off, nuclear war is once again beginning to look quite imminent, though it's not stable LOL super powers doing the bargaining, it's unstable dictators, governments etc that now also have nuclear capabilities.
AshT_200
05-01-2003, 10:35
The Russians have unofficially stated that since the break up of the Soviet Union, Knowledge and Hardware HAS gone to rogue states like Iraq.
SH has been known to have used Chemical weapons in the past and has also used Russian scientists to develop Anthrax, Botulism and Smallpox weapons. Whether he has nukes is irrelevant, because all the previous weapons stated have the capability to kill a lot of people. A smallpox attack would be devastating, especially if he has the strain developed by the Russians that would give you Ebola as well.
Why would he get rid of them and leave his country in a weaker position?
It is recognised that the USSR, the USA and the UK all ignored the treaty banning Biological Weapon research, so why would IRAQ be any different.
I support the War.
Oh ffs that'd be just typical, Nuclear war just before I even get to own a 200sx :rolleyes: ;) :D
Dave
Nismo_Freak
05-01-2003, 10:48
So far i've seen alot of anti-american sentiment from a few people. Point fingers and say all you want but the truth is that your in this together. Bush didnt pick the damn war... stop making Bush out to be the culprit for everything. Perhaps the US should have remained in its isolationist mode and not give a rats ass about anyone else. Sprechen sie Deutsch? ...
Your planes/troops are over there by your countries choice... so before you go blaiming the US for everything check your own leaders. You wanna be ****ed at someone be ****ed at JFK or someone who had the bright idea of getting involved in the middle east.
Nismo_Freak
05-01-2003, 10:48
Originally posted by Dave_S
Oh ffs that'd be just typical, Nuclear war just before I even get to own a 200sx :rolleyes: ;) :D
Dave
I'll let you drive mine... :)
tim rome
05-01-2003, 11:31
my comments about George w. Bush were exactly that, about the man not americans in general, it seems to me (remember that most of the opinions i form are from british news companies ie bbc and itv and occasionally the press) that the Bush family not just the president seem to have a lot of influence in what happens. Perhaps its just that he cant get his message across properly i dont know but watching him is like watching a John Wayne film. As for Bill Clinton well, he is my hero, and most brits love him, he comes over here regularly and fills places to capicity when he does his speeches, just a pity he couldnt have run for a third term. Oh and i voted for war by the way
Bean Bandit
05-01-2003, 11:54
War only means misery! I'm originaly from Israel and I can tell you war is not only what you see on TV. There are too many victims for both people who only wanted to have a calm life. I haven't been to Israel for 3 years yet (believe me I miss it) but the situation at the moment is just too risky for only a holiday (at least for me as I'm always traveling around). IMHO if Bush want's Hussein out then he shall send a dirty dozen which cleares the situation calm and with less attention.
BTW: we had a pic of Bush trying to read a children book to a class but obviously he held the book the wrong way and finaly he said he forgot his glasses so his wife did everything:D
AshT_200
05-01-2003, 11:55
Originally posted by Jezz_S13
And on the same sentiment as Richie not wanting to fight a war he doesn't believe in, I don't want me, my family, friends anyone to be a victim of terrorist attacks due to the fact that 'we' support the US and there game of world domination. I am NOT part of that 'we', neither are most of the population I hope.
So what do you think of Northern Ireland then?
Nuclear War won't happen..... well not around here anyway, I don't think.
It was pointed out that the Israelis have been persecuting the Arabs since the 40's and 50's. But it wasn't mentioned that the Arabs have been persecuting the Jews for thousands of years. The Israelis don't have anywhere else to go and it has been said by countless Arabs (Bin Laden being one of them) that they won't stop until it Israel ceases to exist. Now if that is not a reason to defend ones country to the best of their ability (So what if the happen to end up stronger than their enemies) what is?
A lot of these terrorist attacks have been blamed on Moslems and Islam. These terrorists are using their religion as an excuse and have completely *******ised the name of Islam. But other Moslem people don't help by failing to see this and then they all end up with a bad name.
But we are all missing the point here. The real reasonfor US interest in the middle east, is oil - they don't want the Arab's controlling world oil production.
Saddam wants to be worried when they send Kate Adie over :)
Jezz_S13
05-01-2003, 14:16
Originally posted by AshT_200
So what do you think of Northern Ireland then?
Not a lot.
American funded terrorism, and more religious bullsh*t.
Nuclear War won't happen..... well not around here anyway, I don't think.
Lets just hope that only 1 or 2 little ones get let off then, so that the fallout doesn't trouble us too much around here. LOL :rolleyes:
Easy for people to say yeah lets go to war, how many of you will actually go and risk your life to fight another man's war?
F*ck that...
Nismo_Freak, I'm not slating Americans, I am slating Bush though, he is a lunatic, as is Blair.
Blair is controlled by Bush, Bush calls the shots. I don't agree with either of them, I didn't vote them in. Even if I had, I wouldn't agree with war if it can be avoided, I don't agree with (or believe) this ridding the world of Evil bollox, that's just a front, an excuse for Bush to do as he pleases.
I'm minorly concerned about 2 things in general...
1) Condolezza Rice (Sp?) - the woman who got swept along with Bush and stated, on international TV, that she wished to put the nuclear deterrant on EVERY border.
2) The possibility of another Vietnam.
I can not see, personally speaking from UK media and some US, any reason that would make me support this war.
After all, in the last conflicts, many strategic sites were bombed - by US and UK forces - sites that were actually vital for the civilian population...
War creates no winners. No one can win a war. Everyone lost the 2nd world war, some more than others. This will be no different and on a much greater scale.
Originally posted by Jezz_S13
....I am slating Bush though, he is a lunatic, as is Blair.
Blair is controlled by Bush
And his wife is an absolute Moose.
Wow, what did they do on Christmas Day? Make the kids wear sunglasses at the dinner table or make her wear a cardboard box on her head?
Originally posted by Ripper
And his wife is an absolute Moose.
Seconded! and who really rules the roost ;) :p :)
There are no winners as has been said before :(
Originally posted by Hotrod
Seconded! and who really rules the roost ;) :p :)
There are no winners as has been said before :(
The winner was whoever managed to keep their food down, I suspect.;)
Imagine waking up next to that (etc.).......:eek:
Originally posted by Ripper
Imagine waking up next to that (etc.).......:eek:
Impossible, I can't drink that much :p
Originally posted by Hotrod
Impossible, I can't drink that much :p
You could have the world's biggest coke habit and the need wouldn't be enough!
My God - there's just no excuse!
I mean, when she was in labour (excuse the pun) and about to produce Leo, I wonder if all the medical staff stood at the right end or not.......
LOL again!
They should have removed her head and then squeezed gently!
Too much beer...off to bed! :)
Originally posted by Hotrod
They should have removed her head and then squeezed gently!
Too much beer...off to bed! :)
That's it!
They remove her head and Tony says 'too much beer...off to bed!'
He thinks he banging a corpse - which is preferable, under the circumstances.:D
Has anyone seen the vote lately, at the mo its a tie at 16 votes for each option.
Personally, I aint going to vote, because as I work for the Foreign Office, I know a little more than jo public. :p
Therefore cant comment:p
What people fail to realise is that this is not the time to go to war in the Middle East. There is already a very high anti American/British sentiment there. Although Sadam is not very much liked in the region it will spark even more animosity against the West. I can imagine Ossama hiding in a hole somewhere praying for war. Think of the number of recruits he will get as a result.
Sadam should have been removed during the first war. It was a gross mistake to stop just at the border. It was a gross mistake to stop backing the Kurds. Now is the time to back off the hostility in the Middle East and concentrate on quelling the problem in Israel. Until then it is inviting terrorists to your doorsteps.
Bean Bandit
07-01-2003, 14:09
Originally posted by AshT_200
It was pointed out that the Israelis have been persecuting the Arabs since the 40's and 50's. But it wasn't mentioned that the Arabs have been persecuting the Jews for thousands of years. The Israelis don't have anywhere else to go and it has been said by countless Arabs (Bin Laden being one of them) that they won't stop until it Israel ceases to exist. Now if that is not a reason to defend ones country to the best of their ability (So what if the happen to end up stronger than their enemies) what is?
they are actualy, Israel has the second strongest airfleet in the world and are very strong in ground battles as well but you can't fight an assasin with a tank
I can't resist on commenting that.
true, the war down there is lasting already too long. But as you say they are fighting for years and nothing changed. It turns me sad to see politics and also a lot of people (Israelis, Palastinians and other) not realizing that the way of war wont solve the initial problem. (sadly caused also a bit by the Brits when they made the borders together with the UNO [I think it was the UNO not sure about that though] I'll try to find a early map to visualize what I mean)
The land was simply promised to both people! which logicaly didn't work out so they started to get stronger. Israel had luck to get a lot of help 'cause they suffered from the holocaust and received a lot of sympathy. but it could also be the other way. What realy p***** me off is that the arabian states do not realy help theire friends (palastinians). They support them in theire war but none of them has offered them a place to live.
Both people also need to realize that it isn't possible to turn back time, meaning you can't tell a farmer who built up a farm in the dessert with his bare hands to just leave, but you should kick out a radical who's building his house next to the border only to provoke the other party. If both people would have invest theire money and effort they spend to fight to built up the country together in coexistence they would rule the area together with no doubt.
The sadest thing is I visited and lived in towns at the border and some of them have mixed population with palastinians and israelis livng together in harmony. but there are too many radicals which get a lot of attention so the keep the wounds open instead of ending the suffering. Both people made a lot of big mistakes but unfortunately they are so stubborn that they try to correct them by doing even more mistakes.
It's also sad but true that those people (not all but enough of them) are very religious and this can be used by politics to justify the actions.
I can't blaim the palastinian people to try to survive. But I blaim both political fractions for theire childish behavior to always trying to affect a compromise which is good for one side and bad for the other.
IMHO the only person who'll gain from a war in Iraq is Saddam himself, he'll then be able to die happily with a grin on his face that says 'I succeeded to mess up the whole worl and especialy the US'
Sorry for the long post but it needed to be sayed.
http://www.swr2.de/israel/pics/content/israel_1948.jpg
left is as the UNO thought it shhall be
middle as it was before the independance war
right as it was after the war
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.