Iraq vs. USA

Ramone · Post by **Ramone** » 12 Feb 2003, 03:04

Let's make war not love this season,
Even if we have no reason, Bomb Iraq.

This is the spirit of America... the holy Country.

they will crush the earth

Jonas · Post by **Jonas** » 12 Feb 2003, 09:38

Why do everybody think that this little war will crush the earth??
DonÂ´t anyone remember the second world war. I Europe would have gone in to Germany beforem Hitler had such a big power and ArmÃ© no got damn war would have took place. I think We better stop both Saddam and Bin Ladin before they go together and builds up something big that can cause a third world war. What is better?..A small war or a world war?..

Ramone · Post by **Ramone** » 12 Feb 2003, 13:49

No War.

KD · Post by KD » 12 Feb 2003, 14:35

Both of the countries want war, so there will be a war, coz they'll never say, ok i stop building my army. And maybe this is the smaller bad. Anyway America (prop. USA) has an image to keep that they are the ultimate power in the world, and that is their last chance to prove it, before other countries take the rule, like China or Japan dunno. And they wanna get the oil fields under middle-east, so this is a war of dirty industry.

Ragnar · Post by **Ragnar** » 12 Feb 2003, 19:25

to quote an internal file:

Make levs,
Not war!

Ky.Jelly · Post by **Ky.Jelly** » 12 Feb 2003, 20:27

if suddam wanted to fuk the rest of the world he could of done it years ago wen there wasnt all this terrorism, me thinks that if iraq have to prove they got no weapons of mass destruction then so do the americans,

Hibernatus · Post by **Hibernatus** » 12 Feb 2003, 20:44

Jonas, imagine the following situation:

A crazy dictator takes over sweden, you have much oil in your land, so the american want to bomb your country. they think your life is not worth america's wealth.
I know you can't think that way because an arab life is not worth your life. it's a pity.
Who first helped saddam and bin laden? The bush familly. Yes dude.

Now, about the USA and england. Why do they lie? Don't you think there is always a reason to lie?
Bush inventing stories about saddam (the US medias, especially Fox-propaganda-News, repeat what their government says without checking it).
Tony blair copying a thesis of 1991 (by a californian student, copied even with typos!!), and releasing it as a current report.

We are in democracies, and our governments can lie to us?
Awesome.

And now, what makes me the most nervous, US medias insulting the french, just because we want to save lives. We are thankful for what they did for us during the worldwar, but we helped them 200 years ago too, and is it a good reason for thinking all our life they're right? Damn, i'm pissed off.

Look at bush, he speaks to his people as he would speak to kids with a cowboy costume.
You watch too much movies...

I can love the USA, but right now...

Ky.Jelly · Post by **Ky.Jelly** » 12 Feb 2003, 20:47

but the french have always been good at running away from wars or um surrendering

ribot · Post by **ribot** » 12 Feb 2003, 20:56

it's america that wanna start the war, and they are the only ppl that have actually used atom bombs. it's them who gotta be stopped.

devin · Post by **devin** » 12 Feb 2003, 21:53

did you guys watch secretary of state Colin Powel's speech?

he made some good points about why Iraq should be disarmed, I dont actually want a war, but if thats what it takes....Peace would be nice but shit dont always go the way you want.

This situation also goes back to Hitler. Back in the day the league of nations kept on giving him more time to come clean....just as US weapon inspectors are doing today with Iraq....

but before long, Hitler was in absolute power and killing A LOT of jews. Before you know it, Iraq too will have the power to kill millions and it will already be too late before it starts

i dont know, you decide

devin · Post by **devin** » 12 Feb 2003, 21:58

and why does america have to be considered the "global police"--and for this you resent us....

without us there would be much war, and because of us, people want war...we have tried isolationism before, it did not work at all.

I dont see why you people blame all problems on U.S.

blame america...america did it...its their fault...
OK whatever

Ky.Jelly · Post by **Ky.Jelly** » 12 Feb 2003, 22:28

iraq has had the power for years to kill lots of peple, no thanks to america,

but him and hitler are completely different cases

hitler was tring to get the power to kill the jews
saddam has already killed his "jews" and now just has power,

hes wasnt going to attck anyone and still hasnt attemped to attack anyone

Ky.Jelly · Post by **Ky.Jelly** » 12 Feb 2003, 23:11

ha, this topic has more posts than views, or it did wen i posted this

sorry off topic

onlainari · Post by **onlainari** » 12 Feb 2003, 23:46

He has attacked kuwait and iran,he kills own civilians,there are suspicious links to al-qaida perhaps,and many other suspicious things going on ,says USA. And what USA is to say that? USA is the world number one country,when it's about military power. They spend 5-6 times more money on military than any other country in the world. Terrorists might attack anytime and Saddam is(?) among them. USA don't need any of those facts from powell's speech to go and invade Iraq. Anyway they are trying to inform the rest of the civilized world with a good intelligense information they got. USA should take off Saddam Hussein the best they can(since others don't see USA's point-not helping),maybe they could do it with less massive attacks,but it has to be done. It's not evident that if it is not done now,we are gonna meet crisis soon. But the situation is good for this moment. Iraq is in tight situation and backing from action now would only give Iraq an advantage. As we know,if there is even a little suspicion of link to al-qaida, it is dangerous. Waiting and giving more time for inspections lets Iraq to get rid of from more leads and they can hide them all better.

Hibernatus wrote that if a dictator takes over sweden it becomes dangerous (if oil there). That is pretty much true if the dictator's background is same what Saddam Hussein has+and all the swedish ppl praise him.Then the world need to get into there and stop him inventing any possible military planning. But as you know,the stuff that happens in Sweden is in control since sweden is in coalition with many countries. Muslim world have alienated more from western countries after 9/11,and if USA succeed on invading iraq and helping them to approach the western world,it's a good step. Iraq is neighbouring country of Israel even. Then we need to settle Pakistan to Indonesia and North-Korean situation. Ya have seen the world at 1940's etc...Catastrophical....we have become a good friends almost all over now after all those slaughters...There's still a bright light, if the Muslim world(mid-east,asia) would get as much into western world. Of course they will keep the most of their lifestyle,but they need to get along with other religious group in the same areas.

Victory is never done without bloodshed. That is what some "important" european countries can't understand. They think they can solve it fully by negotiation. But this issue happens to be maybe the biggest issue on earth,it is linked to Israel-Palestinian and to terrorism. It is not of course self-evident that they couldn't disarm Saddam with inspectors and take him off power. Who believes that? Actually they don't even know what they are trying to do. They are trying to get evidence if Saddam is still a bad guy. Then again they agree on some UN Resolutions where US says Saddam must be disarmed and took off from power. I am wondering how this would happen if they don't find his smoking guns. Great-Britain is not different from Germany or France of what they know,but GB understands the situation. America has so much more knowledge of the situation than other countries,that instead stepping on their toes and stopping them all the time is ridicoulos. Of course it is a question of trust too,but who knows who is right? If you listen one guy more than other ,you are influenced by the one you listened more.

-The way- USA might attack is something that UN should start using his power. UN and others should plan the attack together with USA. Instead they step on their big brother's feet and then after the attack they insult USA(of those civilian casualties). What respect is that?

ribot · Post by **ribot** » 13 Feb 2003, 00:26

devin why shouldnt china be the world's police?

usa cant be police because their motto is "do what we say, not what we do". and they start wars, what wars did they make not happen? also, it's obvious how the media in usa don't show u guys the truth, and it's a pity that u believe in it. violence creates violence, if u wanna stop war then ahimsa (ghandi's non violence) is the way to go. u don't go bomb a country for it, especially when many leaders think this crisis can be solved politically. bush is a shame to the world.

Ky.Jelly · Post by **Ky.Jelly** » 13 Feb 2003, 01:16

america is going to do the same thing they did in world war 2 and in kuwait,
they will go in all guns blazing and then just pull out and leave the job half done, in world war 2 the americans pulled back and the war lasted another 7 months, in kuwait they could have demolished suddams empire but money controls everything so u let him go, now there is a mojor problem and you guys want to be seen as the greatest nation, u arnt really that great, the movies and tv have warped peples perception of america compared to the rest of the world, the movies show that america is grand and great and has this great military force and special forces that will crush the world.

experts have rated the SAS special forces many times over the years, and as much as i hate to say it Australia's SAS is regarded as the most effeciant and technologically advanced of them all, the fact that they pump themselves with enuff drugs to take every gold medal at the olympics is beside the point.

All it really comes down to is america thinking that they are the greatest nation and that they can make the rest of the world do what they want,

but remember

one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter,

who is to say that we arnt terrorists to them and ther beliefs

Jesus4ever · Post by **Jesus4ever** » 13 Feb 2003, 06:23

To the tune of "If you're happy and you know it"

If you cannot find Osama, bomb Iraq.
If the markets are a drama, bomb Iraq.
If the terrorists are frisky,
Pakistan is looking shifty,
North Korea is too risky,
Bomb Iraq.

If we have no allies with us, bomb Iraq.
If we think someone has dissed us, bomb Iraq.
So to hell with the inspections,
Let's look tough for the elections,
Close your mind and take directions,
Bomb Iraq.

It's "pre-emptive non-aggression", bomb Iraq.
Let's prevent this mass destruction, bomb Iraq.
They've got weapons we can't see,
And that's good enough for me
'Cos it's all the proof I need
Bomb Iraq.

If you never were elected, bomb Iraq.
If your mood is quite dejected, bomb Iraq.
If you think Saddam's gone mad,
With the weapons that he had,
(And he tried to kill your dad),
Bomb Iraq.

If your corporate fraud is growin', bomb Iraq.
If your ties to it are showin', bomb Iraq.
If your politics are sleazy,
And hiding that ain't easy,
And your manhood's getting queasy,
Bomb Iraq.

Fall in line and follow orders, bomb Iraq.
For our might knows not our borders, bomb Iraq.
Disagree? We'll call it treason,
Let's make war not love this season,
Even if we have no reason,
Bomb Iraq.

someone has been plagiarizing

Ky.Jelly · Post by **Ky.Jelly** » 13 Feb 2003, 11:26

thats fuken good,
is that a jesus original or just a rip

Post by **SveinR** » 13 Feb 2003, 18:02

It's a rip. And very naive.

Hibernatus · Post by **Hibernatus** » 13 Feb 2003, 20:06

I can't read onla's post sorry, too long.
Anyway, if you had more information than propaganda in the USA, you would know that bin laden hates saddam, and he hated the fact that the USA didn't let him free the koweit with his own army.

Do you know the bush family?
Grand father: had business with the nazi during WW2
Father and son: had much business with bin laden.

That guy who said that france and germany were the old europe, that we shouldn't hear them, that guy supported saddam's government, not irak, saddam's government.

france had business with saddam, maybe that's why the american are insulting us every day in the press, but now it has nothing to do with our opinion. just a thing, germany and russia and france didn't say we should leave irak and forget them. they said we should investigate more, because there isn't any proof that a war is needed. so what are your arguments against that? "saddam will kill us while we investigate!" or maybe "i only want to kill, so make war and don't ask questions"?

The USA and england lie to us (we have at least one proof with that fake report). how can you accept that? they lie because the true reasons of the war wouldn't be accepted.

if you keep the pressure on saddam it will do, you don't need to kill the innocent.

now, a question to the american:
don't you think there are more dangerous countries right now?
- saudi arabia
- korea
hmm they don't have oil, they haven't fought again daddy, and they have a too strong army.

bin laden in irak? lol. 11 september used by bush for a purpose he has had before that date.

now about the poor irakian and kuwaitan people tortured by saddam:
ok saddam is a dangerous guy, but he isn't god, he won't live forever, he won't stay there forever. we can put pressure onto him, but bombing the irakian to help them is kinda stupid. inhuman i would say.
look at bin laden: still alive. how many innocent people died because of the american bombing?
you don't care, you see the world as a big strategy game. as long as occidental people don't die, it's ok for you.

a last thing, powell's proofs: lol. it's amazing to se so many people taking them seriously. i'm sorry but i need more.

well, finally i've read most of onla's post. i'm so sad to read such things.
"Victory is never done without bloodshed"
victory against who? has saddam said he would attack anybody?
don't you see how weak is his army?
it's sad to see that only the countries that were the most hurt by world war are now against war.
so you need to experience it? well, then i hope korea will soon send its atomic bombs to the USA so that the USA become a pacifist country.
look at japan: no more atomic stuff. it worked. thabks to the USA for the horror, now japan is a good country.

The USA want to decide to make a war without the UN. don't they care about internationnal rules? damn. it's enough. you guys don't care about people dying, as long as you can play elastomania. you suck, i hate you all. don't use my patch, i haven't made it for murderers.

Post by **Abula** » 13 Feb 2003, 20:55

onla's post too long? Hib's own post even longer. It's cool to argue when another part thinks "I'm absolutely right and don't even bother to read other people's post because they are against me and therefore wrong."

Hib: maybe it's you who doesn't have information but propaganda?

onlainari · Post by **onlainari** » 13 Feb 2003, 21:21

you are making so much non-sense that I don't want to repeat myself...There is a great pressure on Iraq now,that giving more time is not helping the situation. It may keep it at its point,but not really improving it. And who knows it is only helping Saddam,in USA opinion it kind of is. And insulting USA and England is not the point here. They have valid leaders to go with this,so trying to find something negative from their history is immature. I know you can think of that,but everyone knows what they are going to do,because they still tell the rest of the world their move, their opponent won't.

they said we should investigate more, because there isn't any proof that a war is needed. so what are your arguments against that? "saddam will kill us while we investigate!" or maybe "i only want to kill, so make war and don't ask questions"?

yea cool,that's one of the funniest things I read. I shouldn't even post these if you don't read the already written answers. It's the right moment(read old msg why it is) and there are enough proofs. If you next start to post that there is not enough proofs then u don't see,why I did write it here(and old msg too :)

Japan threatens force against N Korea http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2757923.stm

Japan says it might strike North Korea in defence
http://networks.org/?src=stuff:2106,2261871a12,00

Japan is gonna be ready steady if they are threatened.

devin · Post by **devin** » 13 Feb 2003, 22:13

oops, look what has happened...too many words, I dont feel like reading all of this stuff....but i will eventually, i guess you guys can argue all you want, i dont care who is right about this or that or anyother thing....

onlainari · Post by **onlainari** » 13 Feb 2003, 22:47

I don't want to argue about it,just wanted to put my thoughts out somewhere. Haven't written about it anywhere else before.
I don't know am I right but since I am on the same line with anyone else who can only read internet news(+rumours) + television and news papers these arguments are based on them and it's fun to write own thoughts up for later read. There are of course the insights which aren't meant for public.

Other than that I am freerider and I give respect for Bush. My views reflect that I am a peacelover,but it might not look that for those who have read about how Bush uses his weapons leaving depleted uranium and such,but that's why the needed attack should be planned carefully to minimize the civilian casualties

Kopaka · Post by **Kopaka** » 13 Feb 2003, 23:17

damn you write long replys here...

Interesting that you noticed it too. Stop the crap. -Abula

insane guy · Post by **insane guy** » 14 Feb 2003, 13:46

Jonas wrote: I think We better stop both Saddam and Bin Ladin before they go together and builds up something big that can cause a third world war. What is better?..A small war or a world war?..

what the hell??? usa dont need to "go together" with anyone to start wwIII!
maybe thewy already did...

KD · Post by KD » 14 Feb 2003, 14:43

You all ppl take it too seriously in my opinion. There were wars, and there will be wars until human is human, that's it. And we are far from ww3 i think. Moreover i think it would be hard to start a real world war nowadays. Where do you get such fanatic warriors now, like those kamikaze pilots in Japan. Ok this is different now.

Juk · Post by **Juk** » 14 Feb 2003, 15:27

You all ppl take it too seriously in my opinion. There were wars, and there will be wars until human is human, that's it

yeah!!, lets make some war now since we cant avoid wars later in history.

i personly think wars are pretty seriosly and should be considered very carefully.

Where do you get such fanatic warriors now, like those kamikaze pilots in Japan. Ok this is different now.

i am not sure, but I think I can remember som other guys who want to fly planes into other peoples building, just like the kamikaze pilots did.
11. september u know?

insane guy · Post by **insane guy** » 14 Feb 2003, 15:38

KD wrote:You all ppl take it too seriously in my opinion. And we are far from ww3 i think. Moreover i think it would be hard to start a real world war nowadays. Where do you get such fanatic warriors now, like those kamikaze pilots in Japan. Ok this is different now.

i think:
a world war nowadays would result in the death of earth.... and its quite easy to start, and it would be over quite soon, cause everyones dead...

Kopaka · Post by **Kopaka** » 14 Feb 2003, 18:54

ok, haven't read your posts but my opinion is:
EVERYTHING must be to prefore instead of war !!!

magicman · Post by **magicman** » 14 Feb 2003, 20:00

omg so much to read:..

NO WAR!!!
It could start a fucking WorldWar3!! think of it, crash of the earth!
Irak may have some BIO war wepons,,, what if does are in wrong hands?
...

ahh hate this... "mighty USA" <- they think... damn shitheads! :P huh

Hibernatus · Post by **Hibernatus** » 14 Feb 2003, 21:30

Damn the computer i was replying on has just crashed.
So here we go again.

Sorry for speaking in a not clever way, sorry for not reading your posts (i actually finally do, or 80%), but i'm just very nervous these days (and i appologize to Loz for another thread).

First to onla: Japan is talking about self-defense, not "preventive war". Nothing to do with our subject. And still, Japan is against nuclear stuff.

Abula, i'd rather hear your opinion about the war, not your opinion about my way of replying...

Onla, you never speak about the most implied people. The ones we're going to kill. Could you explain me why a low risk of being attacked for us (ok, rather the USA only) justifies a real attack for the Irakian? An irakian life is worth mine. I want to hear you about it.
Powerful occidental countries can defend themselves. Irak is weak. And about the risk of terrorism, it doesn't justify killing innocent people. Sorry, i could live with that risk, as long as we don't have real proofs. And stop saying "it's obvious, they gave us the proofs."
Seeing Powell presenting ridiculous proofs officially is not enough for me. Tell me more.

Propaganda in France? Why not. Let's see, in the news we never see any argument against the war, just facts and comments about how reliable some information is (that is, they just give us the source or the lack of confirmation). Sometimes i admit they dare speak of "propaganda" from the USA and England, but it's obvious, so why not. We can see documents about our responsibility in Irak's armament (obviously not propaganda because it's against france) and the "good" relationship there has been between our president and saddam (old stuff). Then of course, we're reminded of how saddam is a mad dictator.
But of course we also have documents about propaganda in the USA (it exists, there are american associations fighting against it, we don't have such things in france, or have they been killed? lol), about the relationship between saddam and the USA, bin laden and the USA and we even have some experts trying to tell us what could possibly link saddam to bin laden (but the only thing we can see is their hate against the USA, other than that they've always hated each other, mainly because of saddam's cult of himself).

So, since you think there could be propaganda in france, can you inform me, please, is there something i should know to want the war?

Now, something i should hear from you, can you justify the lies we've heard from the governments who want the war?
At least reply about Tony Blair's fake report. Isn't it a part of the propaganda?
And that official army game in the USA? And Fox News? And those stories about saddam, said by Bush but not confirmed by any organization (what is the source then? he has lived with him or what?).

But anyway, let's consider propaganda as a simple tool used when you want to show the world what's good for him.

Tell me, when have you had a real proof of the danger?

I haven't read yet why we should attack Irak and not other dangerous countries. Please tell me, i need to know the real reasons. Give me facts for not waiting a little more.
Has the mad Dr. Saddam a secret weapon which will be ready in two weeks? Let me know, i'm like you, i don't want to die.

What i write is always a mess, so i appologize and please don't comment it, just reply.

"yea cool,that's one of the funniest things I read. I shouldn't even post these if you don't read the already written answers. It's the right moment(read old msg why it is) and there are enough proofs."
You seem so sure. And it's about killing people. So i guess you have something *obvious* to tell me, something i was to blind to see. Convince me.
In france we have that sentence "Ce qui se concoit bien s'ennonce clairement". I don't know how i could translate it well, maybe "what is well conceived is clearly expressed".
So it shouldn't be too hard to give me concrete reasons for bombing a country.

To the people who say "don't make war, it could trigger WW3", i think there's no way, but still it would cause a crisis in the UN. But i admit i would pay less for my oil. Good point. It's worth it.

Juk · Post by **Juk** » 14 Feb 2003, 23:13

He has attacked kuwait and iran

,

Is the war about revenge?

there are suspicious links to al-qaida perhaps,and many other suspicious things going on ,says USA.

Nowadays its possible to prove anything, and the fact that many people and organisations, among them CIA, finds it very unlikely that sadam have given laden any mass-destruction weapons is very well known and accepted. Ofcurse some few connections betwen irak and al-quada have be etablished, but just becuase some few people in a country is terrorists, it dosent means that sadam and then rest of iraq is. I think that saying that people in irak have spoken with bin laden, is just like saying "they are freinds with our enemy, they must be our enemy" or "they are not with us, they must be against us". Its also an argument for the heart, not the brain, since it reminds people of what happened in New York and so on. Bush and his spindoctors (dansih word for people who write what he says ) want to talk to peoples felings so people forget to think , an idea which was orginally invented by the nazis (i think) .

To attack iraq would by many people (in middle-east and those countries) be considdered as a war based on religion and therefor be a great help for bin laden and al-quada. To call the war fight against terrorism is bullshit, unless you define terrorism as something else.
Many people think that iraq is just the kind of country which woul work together with al-quada, but i dont think this is true. Al-quada dislike iraq and sadam becuase they have attacked kuwait and becuase al-quada and iraq is very different in the way they want to control things. Iraq and sadam is very secualry (in arabian eyes), while al-quada belives that everything is controlled by god.

But the situation is good for this moment. Iraq is in tight situation and backing from action now would only give Iraq an advantage

What do u mean by saying they are in a thigt situation right now? Iraq have been prepared to war in a long time. thats why all these sancsations only had effect on civilian people. the money which sadam dident have for weapons and military because of these sancsations, he just took from the civilian people. the hate against usa is very high right now among the civilian population and many people and cities have been given weapons and been intructed how to baricade and fight for their regions.
if the mainpurpose of the war only is kill sadam then it would be much bether just to relax and then sudenly make a sniper attack. think of it it! what if u killed sadam with 1 single shoot. ofcurse the regime of him would still be there .
An argument for not making the war right now: Terrorism. war will gain alot of support to terrorism and there will proberly be lots of attacks, not only in usa but also in europe. the diplomatic situation between asia and usa and specially between middle east and usa is getting crittical thx to bush. a war now would make this situation to hell.

all the borders of iraq is being watched and guarded, not only by usa, but also by all the countries which want to support usa. the "good intelligense information" from usa would probely let people know if sadam tried to move these wepaons he should have. if the inspectors was in iraq, sadam would never dare to move those weapons. it would just be discovered then. he would proberly try to keep them secret, instead of making to much attention. i dont think there is any reason for being in such a hurry to make this war.

giving more time is not helping the situation. It may keep it at its point,but not really improving it. And who knows it is only helping Saddam,in USA opinion it kind of is

it may not improve the situation just to investigate, but it will defently give us the right knowledge to decide wich kind of solution which is the right one. if usa is so sure that a war is the right solution, then why dont they want to make furhter investigations? The reasons for usa or bush too make this war is maybe not to fight for world peace but something else. if it is discovered that the war dosent help world peace then usa dont get all this oil or power which i think the war really is about. therefor usa want to hurry so much. a war have been in the air for pretty long time now and a single month woulden help sadam doing something he mussent do. anyway many things he does is getting recorded by satelites and he have defently no connection with al-quada.

did you guys watch secretary of state Colin Powel's speech?
he made some good points about why Iraq should be disarmed, I dont actually want a war, but if thats what it takes....Peace would be nice but shit dont always go the way you want.

i dident hear that speech, could u plz come up with some of his arguments devin?

This situation also goes back to Hitler. Back in the day the league of nations kept on giving him more time to come clean....just as US weapon inspectors are doing today with Iraq....

First of all: i am sick and tired of people comparing these two wars. Its a rhetoric trick wich makes usa the good and sadam the bad. when people compare themself too the allies from second ww they should be ashamed for using other peoples fight for freedom to reach their own goals.
Second: the nations of europe dident give hitler time. the reason why they dident attack was that they dident realize what had happend in germany. the reason why they dident attack when they finally found out was that it would be to risky to attack imedialy. it would be much bether to wait. if second ww would have begun 2 years later hitler couldent even have conquered France. unfortunaly hitler began to attack jewes people in poland. it is therefor nonsens to compare the old situation with the situation today.

- saudi arabia
- korea
hmm they don't have oil, they haven't fought again daddy, and they have a too strong army.

saudi arabia have much oil

onla's post too long? Hib's own post even longer

actually onla's post is longer than Hib's

Many people claims that sadam should be stopped becuase he will use and already use and have used mass-destruction weapons, but dont forget that he only did while he could rely on the support by usa. the 2 times sadam have gone into war in the 25 years where he have dominated the politic in iraq he could also exspect ignorance and support from usa. is sadam really such a great danger? the only reason to start the war is to stop sadam and his regime.

another thought:I think this war is about votes. before 11. september bush wasent a populary president. all this war, all this hate and all this no thinking only feelings stuf is the best way for bush to become popular.

I don't want to argue about it,just wanted to put my thoughts out somewhere. Haven't written about it anywhere else before

i think this is a good place to write about this subjekt. all share ur openinons plz![/quote]

onlainari · Post by **onlainari** » 15 Feb 2003, 00:45

quick response to hib:

the Japan thing, USA led attack will do the same thing. Japan launch an self-defense attack if they are threatened....same with USA,of course Japan could kill innocent koreans then etc..

Have I talked about much of propaganda..? hmm,I said there at least later then that everyone is on the same line with all the same news. Maybe US news channels provide more proUSA news,but still they have internet etc. And i'm not watching the situation based on USA news.

Then about making you to want war. No,it's a question about trusting. There are pro and against facts for attack. It's either investigating and staying in risk zone (that would increase the risk even if (once again) they,iraq, get more time to plan stuff) or then to attack on right moment,before it gets harder to succeed.

Then your talk about Iraq and that it is poor and not so powerful,how do you know that? If investigators find something that shouldn't be there every week,I wouldn't say they couldn't have possibilty to be strong,but u think they are weak because u don't have proof. U know that one can be strong if he lies to be weak.

Fake report was pretty hilarious. England is is not saying NO for investigation but doesn't say NO for attack,they are kinda lil bro there,so it doesn't weight much there. But anyway the report wasn't so fake,it was based on real information,their source was kinda illegal though.

I hear real proofs of danger all the time. But you might refer that "have I seen real proof that they will launch attack on someone,and what day that will happen?" As mentioned many times before,it's self-defense and preventing Iraq's danger. And based on findings,a dumb one can even understand that there could be something coming up sooner or later. And later is enough to get them disarmed QUICKLY before it is too late.

m0nkeii · Post by **m0nkeii** » 15 Feb 2003, 02:56

think about this
japan and germany, devastated by the second world war, with suffering economy and a bleak future. america, rich and powerful, help them out of the gutter. look at them now. two world powers, both on the 'good' side.
after the last war with iraq, usa should have helped iraq more than they did. iraq could now be a powerful ally of the us, but instead they rally against them
america is being arrogant (as usual). they should leave iraq alone.

ribot · Post by **ribot** » 15 Feb 2003, 16:26

who protects us when USA are gonna use their weapons to take the world?

DacBitch · Post by **DacBitch** » 15 Feb 2003, 18:57

save the world - bomb usa

sorry,........

devin · Post by **devin** » 15 Feb 2003, 20:53

you guys are brain washed to hate us

Ky.Jelly · Post by **Ky.Jelly** » 15 Feb 2003, 22:16

devin wrote:you guys are brain washed to hate us

you guys are brainwash to think ur the greatest in the world and that whatever you say goes

Akesson · Post by **Akesson** » 15 Feb 2003, 23:18

Usa wants to attack iraq because they THINK not know that they got dangerous weapons...
Its well known that North korea got nuclear weapons or trying to develop it... But with them usa wants to go the diplomatic way....!?!?!?!? so iraqs weapons cant be the reason because if it would be why are they not going to attack korea then? .. maybe some hidden reason? oil?

Ky.Jelly · Post by **Ky.Jelly** » 16 Feb 2003, 01:54

i kno
lets all attack little old new zealand,
it will be all over in one missile and in a few years no one will care

ribot · Post by **ribot** » 16 Feb 2003, 04:02

devin wrote:you guys are brain washed to hate us

brain washed by who? i dont think any european country supports irak, but some of them at least wanna prevent an unnecessary war.

Juk · Post by **Juk** » 16 Feb 2003, 17:58

you guys are brain washed to hate us

arguments?

Hibernatus · Post by **Hibernatus** » 16 Feb 2003, 19:16

Well, onla, i'm glad to see your posts are less and less "agressive" (agressive is not the right word, but i can't think of any better one). But i still haven't had the answers i was waiting for.

Juk's post is (once again) too long for lazy me (and i'm tired, just arrived by train from a lovely weekend). But anyway it looks like a well expressed and well argumented reply against the war

Still one thing, onla: preventive war != defense. How dare you compare Japan with the USA. That's the only ridiculous thing in your posts. The rest is a question of opinion.

Hmm i'm tired of that discussion, and here in france all the people i know are against the war, so i quit the thread

MopoGirl · Post by **MopoGirl** » 16 Feb 2003, 19:22

Hibernatus wrote:I know you can't think that way because an arab life is not worth your life.

i completely agree

Hibernatus · Post by **Hibernatus** » 16 Feb 2003, 19:33

oh my god, i know i've just said i would quit that thread (liar, me? noooooo

), but mopogirl, i sincerely hope you don't say you agree because you are israeli and hate the arab! please tell me you didn't mean what i think you could have meant!

Post by **Abula** » 16 Feb 2003, 21:31

Juk wrote:Bush and his spindoctors (dansih word for people who write what he says ) want to talk to peoples felings so people forget to think , an idea which was orginally invented by the nazis (i think) .

Bad argument.

You're referring to the nazis to get other people thinking: Nazis are bad == everything which is invented by nazis is bad == nazis invented this idea == the idea is bad

The mistake is that most likely not everything invented by nazis is bad. People have such strong feeligs about nazis that they always think automatically that all things they did are bad.

Ikop · Post by **Ikop** » 16 Feb 2003, 22:24

Hibernatus,
i think that you don't know,
but when you live in ISRAEL it's very easy to hate arabs.
we have here a small city called netanya with population of only 200 thousand people,
and in the last 2 years thre were here 5 or 6 terrorists attack and acts of suicide bombing and it was made by arabs.

i don't hate arabs
i just wanted to clear somthing that all of the people would understand what is the filing to arabs people, when you live in jerusalem, tel -aviv or netanya.

Juk · Post by **Juk** » 16 Feb 2003, 22:39

Juk wrote:
Bush and his spindoctors (dansih word for people who write what he says ) want to talk to peoples felings so people forget to think , an idea which was orginally invented by the nazis (i think) .

Bad argument.

You're referring to the nazis to get other people thinking: Nazis are bad == everything which is invented by nazis is bad == nazis invented this idea == the idea is bad

The mistake is that most likely not everything invented by nazis is bad. People have such strong feeligs about nazis that they always think automatically that all things they did are bad.

Its pretty obvius why this way of argumenting is insane: It makes people think with the heart and the feelings instead of the brain.

the reason why i tell about the nazis is to show how effective this method is (most people give stupidety, not evil, as the reason why so many germans followed the nazis .

anyway u are right that i did it myself: thinking of bush doing the same as adolf is just like saying that he have same openions as them.

MopoGirl · Post by **MopoGirl** » 17 Feb 2003, 15:12

Hibernatus wrote:oh my god, i know i've just said i would quit that thread (liar, me? noooooo ), but mopogirl, i sincerely hope you don't say you agree because you are israeli and hate the arab! please tell me you didn't mean what i think you could have meant!

no, i don't hate arabs! i meant that i agree that ppl who live in USA/scandinavia/whatever just can't understand it because they think that killing an arab is like killing a bug, completely unimportant and no big dill whatsoever.
well guess what, their culture may be different from yours but they're humans beings, they want to live to.
those who i do hate, are the terrorists, which are arabs (and you can't blame me for hating them), but that doesn't mean i hate all arabs.

can you imagine being terrified of an every-day thing like getting on a bus?

and btw, USA bombing iraq = iraq bombing israel