Originally posted by LeHah
You want us to save the villians from themselves?
I'm sure places like Iraq would have a number of enemies. White supremists, extreme left and right factions (sounds like No War On Iraq Committee versus Government if you ask me, but anyway), anti Islam terrorists and such were people I was thinking of.
Originally posted by Aries
mabye we already have given out the info. remember, we're just the citizens. the gov doesn't tell us everything
True.
Originally posted by Aries
just cause we're sending troops over doesn't mean we're gonna go to war. all it means is that if the war comes, we won't waste time getting our military into position. now, that being said, sending troops over usually means that there will be war, but it is never a guarentee
Something tells me that Saddam will worm his way out of war at the last minute.
Originally posted by Aries
agreed, Saddam and Bin Laden don't like each other. but remember the old maxim....the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
You're right. Remember how I said that nothing's impossible? Well it's not impossible. In fact when America said they had proof that there was a connection (proof it never showed, by the way) I was fully convinced. But somehow I don't think Saddam is brave enough to take part in actions against the US.
Originally posted by Napoleon
I vote to not attack anyone. It is hipocritical, we have all the weapons we are claiming as cause to attack these people for.
Yes, exactly. Why say 'disarm your nuclear weapons otherwise we will use nuclear weapons on you'?
Originally posted by Napoleon
Plus to attack north korea is about as stupid as possible, they dont want a fight, THEY WANT TO EAT. they are using their nuclear abilities as a bargining chip to try to get food and energy. The us under a 1994 treaty promised to provide them with their energy needs in exchange for them decommisioning a reactor. 8 years later we werent meeting the terms of the treaty so they reactivated the reactor. Likewise we promised them lots of stuff in exchange for them to not develope nukes. We havent fufilled our side of the deal, why should they?
North Korea is no threat, period. You want them to stop developing nukes, feed them, give them heat so they dont continue to freeze to death. that is how you win there.
Funny we haven't heard anything about this.
Originally posted by Napoleon
Iraq, 72% of americans according to a recent poll are against war in iraq with good reason.
I think you'll find that now most of the world is against Bush and America. I just wish it was possible to be against war and be neutral.
Originally posted by Napoleon
First off the united states are not the world's police, we have no right to do ANYTHING against any other country unless we are attacked first, if we do, we are engaging in an aggressive war which is a warcrime.
No, America does not have the right to parade around as the world's police force. But they are the only superpower left.
Originally posted by Napoleon
The Chicago city council said it best, the cost of 1 cruise missile would solve their educational problems for the next year. The cost of deploying that battlegroup that just left san diego, would be enough to solve the educational problems of the state of Illinois for the next decade.
Damn straight.
Originally posted by Napoleon
The world is against these proposed actions.
Morality is against these proposed actions.
Our own best interest is against these proposed actions.
Most americans are against these proposed actions.
I just hope that Shrub will listen.
Originally posted by Napoleon
Basically the only beneficiaries of this war are Bush's best friends, the oil companies.
I don't really hold to that theory. The amount of oil that would be used in war wouldn't be worth it, and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot. Now yes, Shrub is war hungry and such, but idiots arn't elected President. Noy Shrub, not anyone.
Originally posted by ChrisReid
So maybe police officers shouldn't go after crazy gun nuts or radicals hoarding explosives or whatnot. It's hypocritical since police have all sorts of weapons too.
'Crazy' gun nuts. I think that the police farce are entrusted with these weapons because they will, for the most part, use them responsibly. Sure, about as many civvies would as well, but there is a hard fact I like to call Phillip's First Rule of Reality: Sometimes the minority will ruin things for the majority.
Originally posted by ChrisReid
For a couple more years until they want more again. It's called appeasement. It didn't work with Hitler, and it won't work with Korea. If we don't learn our lessons from history, history will repeat itself.
Hmmmmm...like not continuing the War on Terrorism to appease Binladen, you mean?