Home News Reviews Forums Shop


Should the US attack Iraq?

What was that?

Should the US attack Iraq?

1: Yes
13
37%
2: No
18
51%
3: Not Sure \ Don't know
4
11%
 
Total votes : 35

Should the US attack Iraq?

Postby hjs on Thu Jan 01, 1970 4:45 am

What do you think, should the US attack Iraq?
User avatar
hjs
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2002 10:57 am
Location: Zwaag, the Netherlands

Postby hjs on Thu Jan 01, 1970 4:45 am

I voted No.

because:
How is the US going to get troops in Iraq, the whole region is against an attack, only through Turkey or through the persian golf is possible.

How is Iraq going to respond, attack israel !!
And how is Israel responding to the poison-gas attacks, Nuclear ??

What if the US succeed, what next. Iraq is going to be splitt in at least 3 new countries, and then?

The only person with some real millitary experience in this Bush goverment isn't very happy with this (powell).

Saddam is dangerous, but i'm affraid this will start WW III
and then the world is in a lot more trouble
Last edited by hjs on Tue Sep 10, 2002 9:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
hjs
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2002 10:57 am
Location: Zwaag, the Netherlands

Postby Ian on Thu Jan 01, 1970 4:45 am

I'm not getting into this one... I got enough threats via email last year.
"Blu-ray is just a bag of hurt." - Steve Jobs
User avatar
Ian
Grand Poobah
 
Posts: 15070
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 2:34 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Postby BuddhaTB on Thu Jan 01, 1970 4:46 am

We shouldn't be discussing this political issue in a computer hardware forum. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions or what not.
User avatar
BuddhaTB
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1865
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:50 pm
Location: Southern California (LA & Orange County)

Postby hjs on Thu Jan 01, 1970 4:47 am

But i want to know everybody's opinion.


One question. Why Iraq? We still haven't seen any proof that Saddam has anything to do with today one year ago. Saddam is dangerous, but there are a lot of other countries in that region that are just as dangerous.
Iran, Syria also will have mass-destruction weapons (among others).

But why Iraq, is it frustration that they still haven't caught Bin Laden? Or does he want to finish the job his father didn't ? Or ????
User avatar
hjs
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2002 10:57 am
Location: Zwaag, the Netherlands

Postby Ian on Thu Jan 01, 1970 4:47 am

The goverment's excuse is that he hasn't allowed inspectors in to do their jobs... but Saddam's been doing that for years. Why attack now?

Personally, I think they need to attack someone since they can't find Bin Ladin. Who better than Iraq?
"Blu-ray is just a bag of hurt." - Steve Jobs
User avatar
Ian
Grand Poobah
 
Posts: 15070
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 2:34 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Its all money

Postby KimoCal on Thu Jan 01, 1970 4:52 am

Its all about OIL. That's what Desert Storm was all about. What's even funnier is that the VP Dick Cheney is a CEO of a company that purchases foreign oil and one of their biggest customers is Iraq? Go figure. I guess you don't mix politics with business....

Food for though

KimoCal
KimoCal
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2002 3:51 am
Location: San Diego, CA, USA

Postby hjs on Thu Jan 01, 1970 4:55 am

Bush = Oil = politics.
All his major politics acts are about oil!!
why do you think he doesn't support the Kyoto agreements?
Because his Texan oil friends will sell less !!.
User avatar
hjs
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2002 10:57 am
Location: Zwaag, the Netherlands

Re: Its all money

Postby Matt on Thu Jan 01, 1970 4:56 am

KimoCal wrote:Its all about OIL. That's what Desert Storm was all about. What's even funnier is that the VP Dick Cheney is a CEO of a company that purchases foreign oil and one of their biggest customers is Iraq? Go figure. I guess you don't mix politics with business....

Food for though

KimoCal


I think you've got it all wrong, big business have the most lobbying power out of anyone. Who do you think donates the most to candidates campaines?
User avatar
Matt
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 2:34 pm
Location: Boulder, CO

Postby Inertia on Thu Jan 01, 1970 5:56 am

Ian wrote:Personally, I think they need to attack someone since they can't find Bin Ladin. Who better than Iraq?


I think they should attack The Netherlands. :o

That would be much better than Iraq and then hjs would really have something to Rant n' Rave about. 8) :lol:
Inertia
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 5:22 pm

Postby hjs on Thu Jan 01, 1970 5:56 am

LOL

you know this is really an issue !!
because the setting of the International Court in The Hague and the US could invade the Netherlands if they will have some US soldiers brought to justice.

UK, Italy eye U.S. court deal

can't find the real artikel :(
User avatar
hjs
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2002 10:57 am
Location: Zwaag, the Netherlands

Postby Tubtanic on Fri Jan 03, 2003 8:57 pm

Bush should be going after France. Remember Iran? Who do you think
organized that bloody mess? Who do you think kept doing business with
Iraq when the entire world agreed to support an economic embargo to
Iraq in check.

Who keeps Africa unstable by encouraging massive corruption?

Another bad guy is definitely Saudi Arabia. Remember the 1973 Oil Crisis?
That was the muslim world's first attempt at bring the western world to its
knees and did. Problem is that the U.S. government looked the other way. What do I mean? Saudi Arabia bought 50 billion dollars worth of US military equipment and engineering with the money they made off the crisis. This event put the US economy six feet under under unitl Bush Sr. left town. Ex CIA King Pin.

Attack Iraq? Look around. Saddam is an ex employee of the CIA. Who do you think put him there in the first place? Bush Sr.

Attack Iraq? Does the US want to blow another 200 billion dollars and once again not finish the job like Desert Storm or Vietnam? Castro is still in power. 40 years now.

The last time Bin Ladden came out of BW's mouth was back in July. Has he forgotten about the most dangerous human on earth. If we give him enough time will he forget about Saddam and Korea? It's the same old story. Don't know how to get the economy going? Find a bad guy to get the average Joe's attention on something else than the failing economy.
Tubtanic
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:45 am

Postby cfitz on Fri Jan 03, 2003 9:12 pm

Wow Tubtantic! Only two posts, and they are both "Rants n' Raves". I guess you don't believe in making a friendly introduction... :wink:

That's okay. Rant and rave all you like (but remember that this is a family site - not that you have said anything out of line so far).

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby Tubtanic on Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:40 am

Mr. Cfitz,
You are 100 percent correct. I apologize to all members of the forum.

Mr. Cfitz thank for your extremely generous reply concerning
my first rant. I was very impressed. Thanks, again.
Tubtanic
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:45 am

Postby cfitz on Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:55 am

Tubtanic, I honestly can't tell whether your last post is genuine or sarcastic - no offense intended.

If it is genuine, then don't feel that way. You've got nothing to apologize for. As I said, you haven't done anything out of line. It was just curious that your first and only two (now three) posts to the forums were in the Rants n' Raves section. That's not something we normally see around here. Perhaps I owe you an apology for coming across too harshly. I didn't intend it that way. My post was just a friendly nudge.

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby Kennyshin on Sun Jan 05, 2003 9:04 am

In South Korea, people are actually talking about the possibility of another war with North Korea and how many more would die if the North used nuclear arms.

The truth is hard to find out in a country just yet liberated from military dictatorship that lasted till the late 1980s or even late 1990s. Right now, some members at KBench.com community are talking about how Japan is going to be erased out of map. It makes one popular here. They feel happy to watch a Bruce Lee movie where Chinese fighters easily beat Japanese soldiers and samurai.
Kennyshin
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1173
Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 12:56 am

Postby Tubtanic on Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:41 pm

Mr. Cfitz,

Once again, I have to agree with you.
Starting out with two rants could give
the wrong impression.

Obviously, rightly so, this is the case
with your questioning the true intent
of the apologie.

My apologie is definitely sincere.

Funny. Now, I can't type anything without
my thinking it has some kind of sarcastic
undertone. Oh well. : )
Tubtanic
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:45 am

Postby cfitz on Mon Jan 06, 2003 2:18 pm

Tubtanic wrote:My apologie is definitely sincere.

I do appreciate your desire to be considerate, but let me reiterate: you haven't done anything wrong and an apology isn't necessary. So please don't feel bad.

Tubtanic wrote:Funny. Now, I can't type anything without
my thinking it has some kind of sarcastic
undertone. Oh well. : )

Don't worry about it! I will take your words at face value. :)

By the way, there is no need to call me Mr. Cfitz. We aren't that formal around here. 8)

Anyway, let me wish you a proper, if somewhat belated, welcome to the forums. Please continue to post, in Rants n' Raves or whatever forum you wish. :D

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby Tubtanic on Tue Jan 07, 2003 4:48 pm

Mr. Cfitz,

I appreciate you taking the time to make me feel welcomed into your
forum.

Thanks again, Cfitz.


Hello everyone! I'm Tubtanic.
Tubtanic
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:45 am

Postby 50 cents on Tue Jan 14, 2003 7:26 pm

what is this love connection? :D :lol: 8)
i think we should attack iraq anyway. beacuse if we don't they will try
We ridin around with guns the size of Little Bow Wow What you know about a.k's and a.r 15's
Equipped, with night vision, shell catchers and dem things
User avatar
50 cents
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 1:30 pm

Postby jase on Sun Jan 19, 2003 2:08 am

What concerns me is the UK getting involved. The US will always be a target; its position as the main superpower and its less-than-completely-squeaky-clean foreign policies single it out for trouble. But the UK, in its position as a fairly minor little country when all said and done, acting as Bush's lapdog is making this island a target when it shouldn't be. It stinks as far as I am concerned -- it's not as if we're going to make much of a difference, and it's not as if we'll get anything back in return. The US needs allies only to get its own way. The US is no ally of the UK -- think about it.
jase
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 8:00 pm

Postby cfitz on Sun Jan 19, 2003 2:12 am

jase wrote:The US is no ally of the UK -- think about it.

You can't think of anything the US has ever done to help out the UK?

I do find your "let the US do all the dirty work" attitude distressingly common among Europeans. It is unfortunate.

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby dodecahedron on Sun Jan 19, 2003 2:42 am

short memory?

anyway, when terror attacks are far from you they are easier to ignore.
look what happened in the US after September 11.

it's not like terrorist don't stike in Europe, they just do it less. so it's easy to just put it out of mind.
1970's - now there was a merry time to be in Europe. Badder Meinhoff, Red Brigades...
but i'm sure most citizens of England don't take so remote a view of the IRA as they do of Iraq, eh jase? can you say "Guildford" ?

i saw the other day on the TV news some Iraqi bigwig in Damascus doing some negotiations for Saddam as a possibility of a foreign exile (not that i'm buying into it). he's the same guy who was responsible for gassing the Kurd minority opposition in the north of the country.
yes, contraty to common opinion, the most recent use of Gas warfare was not World War I, it was much more recent. against civilian population too.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the land of Mordor, where the Shadows lie
-- JRRT
M.C. Escher - Reptilien
User avatar
dodecahedron
DVD Polygon
 
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2002 12:04 am
Location: Israel

Postby jase on Sun Jan 19, 2003 12:57 pm

No, you misunderstand me.

First, the US thing. The world is a very different place from the world of the 1940s. The US is now the only superpower. It doesn't *need* allies as such, they're just useful when canvassing world opinion.

Look at Afghanistan. Now, I was all for British involvement in that conflict, and I still think we were right to back Bush all the way on that one. The result might not be as clear-cut as we all wanted it to be, but it was worth doing. But, less than a month after the UK commits substantial effort to the war against Bin Laden, what does Bush go and do? Imposes punitive trade restrictions against Europe with regards to steel production, risking the jobs of hundreds of thousands of employees. Not related, but the unfortunate timing is a clear demonstration of how little thought the US government has for the welfare of its so-called allies. If Europe had done this to the US, particularly at that time, they'd have gone ballistic.

The war with Iraq is different. I have grave misgivings about the whole thing. Yes, Saddam is evil, and he is responsible for the deaths of thousands of his own people, but then there are actually far worse despots around the world whom we turn a blind eye to, indeed we've supported in the past (who sold Iraq its weapons in the first place?). Poor South Korea is potentially now in imminent danger, and we do nothing. Support in these circumstances really should not be as unconditional as it is in the case of this country IMHO, I'm sorry. It's not the support I have a problem with, it's the unquestioning nature. When Europe, largely led by Blair, wished to sort Kosovo out, Clinton dragged his heels, quite rightly. In WWII, the US only joined some years into the conflict.

As for the IRA, I don't think I need to mention the substantial economic assistance the US gave to this terrorist group, including help from some congressmen, in the years leading up to 2001.
jase
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 8:00 pm

Postby cfitz on Sun Jan 19, 2003 1:56 pm

jase wrote:The US is now the only superpower. It doesn't *need* allies as such, they're just useful when canvassing world opinion.

Sure the US needs allies. The US can't do everything by itself, and shouldn't be expected to. Every country should carry its fair share of the burden. And there are certainly areas where other countries have better capabilities or resources than the US. For example, intelligence gathering and strategically located military bases.

jase wrote:But, less than a month after the UK commits substantial effort to the war against Bin Laden, what does Bush go and do? Imposes punitive trade restrictions against Europe with regards to steel production, risking the jobs of hundreds of thousands of employees. Not related, but the unfortunate timing is a clear demonstration of how little thought the US government has for the welfare of its so-called allies.

That kind of stuff goes on all the time, and the Europeans are just as guilty of it as the Americans or any other peoples. All nations still act in their own self-interest first. But even when allies have differences of opinion, that doesn't mean they aren't allies anymore. It is unrealistic to expect complete agreement on all matters. Ask any husband and wife and they will tell you not even two people can agree all the time, let alone hundreds of millions.

jase wrote:The war with Iraq is different. I have grave misgivings about the whole thing. Support in these circumstances really should not be as unconditional as it is in the case of this country IMHO, I'm sorry. It's not the support I have a problem with, it's the unquestioning nature.

A lot of people have misgivings, even in the US. There were multiple demonstrations throughout the US just yesterday, protesting a possible war with Iraq. I myself wonder why the sudden attention to Iraq. The world has been letting Saddam violate the UN mandates for 12 years now, so what has changed? Is it a realization that he truly is dangerous and it is time to stop hiding our heads in the sand? Is it revenge time for the benefit of Daddy who didn't do the job right the first time? Is it a lust for oil? Is it new information (unavailable to you and me) that Saddam is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons and must be stopped now?

Personally I wish I knew the truth, but I will never be privy to such information. Depending on what is really going on, I could be all for going to war or all for leaving Saddam alone for now.

I will say this, though. Saddam is a dangerous and, yes, evil man, and anyone pretending otherwise is doing himself a disservice. And for those fretting about the possibilities of civilian casualties in a war with Iraq I would say two things. First, it is a little late and hypocritical to be bringing that up now. There have already been substantial civilian casualties in Iraq - casualties caused by Saddam himself. Second, if you want to worry about civilian casualties, start worrying about what happens when Saddam eventually acquires nuclear weapons and decides to make himself a hero in the Arab world by detonating a nuclear weapon in Israel. That will lead to a conflagration with loss of life that will dwarf anything contemplated for a US invasion of Iraq now. And don't fool yourself into thinking Saddam wouldn't do it. He has already demonstrated multiple times his willingness and ability to start wars and use weapons of mass destruction.

Pretending that everything will be okay if we just keep our heads down and mind our own business will not make it so. Just ask the souls of the millions who suffered and died at the hands of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mobutu, etc. Peace in our time, indeed...

jase wrote:As for the IRA, I don't think I need to mention the substantial economic assistance the US gave to this terrorist group, including help from some congressmen, in the years leading up to 2001.

This is another one of those things that occurs in all nations - you will always find people looking to do harm in any nation. But you must not confuse twisted individuals within a country supporting terrorism for support by a country as a whole. I don't debate that misguided and worse Americans have supported the IRA and continue to do so. But it isn't right, and America as a nation does not support the IRA officially or unofficially.

It is interesting how one's viewpoint on groups espousing violence to bring about their aims changes from "freedom fighters" to "terrorists" depending on whether or not the violence is directed towards oneself. (This isn't directed to you personally, Jase. It is just an observation that seems to apply everywhere, whether the example is the IRA, the Chechen rebels, the Taliban, etc.)

Oh, one last thing. One common thread to many of the areas of greatest instability and suffering in the world today (the middle east, Kashmir, Africa etc.) is the hand of European imperialism in general and British colonialism in particular. So I don’t think the US needs any lectures regarding “less-than-completely-squeaky-clean foreign policies” from Europeans. Much strife in the current world can trace its roots back to European adventurism, and in my opinion the world would probably be much more stable today if it wasn’t for the exploitation, corrupt political systems and arbitrarily defined nation-states for which the European colonial powers are directly responsible.

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Next

Return to Rants n' Raves

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

All Content is Copyright (c) 2001-2021 CDRLabs Inc.