Ok, but tell me, who do you really think is the bigger threat.....Iraq, North Korea, or Bin Laden?

Man Limbaugh scares you guys - I haven't listened to the radio in probably a year - so you can blow that on out your ass - so very typical though...

But yes - you have it right - we're going to bomb them to free them.

It's FAR too complicated for you to understand - but that's basicly how it's going to work...

Enjoy the "Lights Over Baghdad Show" when it starts - I sure will!

Your intellect and argumentive skills continually amaze me.

Its not hard to understand why you love Bush so much.....water seeks its own level.

Ha... and that's the BEST you could do ?


I concede to your powers of the language oh wise one.

And less you not continue to be confused....

It's not Bush I'm defending my friend - it's America - and that just happens to include it leaders and it's military.

Amen.

You're trying to discuss whether USA should attack Iraq or not, but all you manage to do is starting a war of words with the one's that has another opinion than yourself....

:1orglaugh

I think all three deserve to be dealt with.

Personally, I don't think N. Korea has any intention of nuking anyone. They want to get the US to the bargaining table for something so they're running their yappers. When someone's waving a nuke and yelling "We'll kill you all" it's kind of hard to pile up the troops and go blasting in though. This isn't Duke Nukem or Command and Conquer (or whatever that game is called). So something else will be done.

Whether or not Bush tells you everything that's going on, the hunt for Osama does continue. People think that because you have expensive satellites, you should be able to find anyone you want in a heartbeat, but it doesn't work like that. The hunt continues and eventually he will be caught. People have no patience.

Right now, though, Saddam is attempting to develop weapons like N. Korea has. If you ignore him now, you'll have another N. Korea on your hands. Then what? Then people will complain the US didn't stop them when they had the chance.

Everyone who complains has no alternative suggestions, other than "leave them all alone" which is not an acceptable option.

I'm sure if we could snap our fingers and take care of all three at once, we would. But it's not that easy.

And like I said, if we did invade N. Korea and not Iraq people would complain anyways because we aren't killing all the bad guys in one fell swoop.

So for now, each one is being dealt with in the appropriate manner, in my opinion. If someone has a better idea, I'm sure the world would love to hear it. And "leave them alone they didn't do anything" is not acceptable.

p.s. The "You can't kill Saddam because there are other bad guys in the world" comments hold no water.

There are murders who are as of yet uncaught. It doesn't stop us from putting the ones we have in jail.

http://aviaforce.free.fr/avions/imag.../f14/f14_2.jpg
Eyecandy!

They will NEVER EVER invade north korea, look at that country, its worse than the USSR used to be. They mean business when they say they'll fight back, those arent terrorists, u know..

LOL
Russia - world's second largest oil exporter, behind only Saudi Arabia.

That's true. I have spoken with the ex-Russian foreign minister, Andrei Kozyrev, and the ONLY reason Russia is against the war is because she does not want to send an image to the world that anything the US proposes and does, Russia will do the same. He said that Russia is actually for the war and does not want to waste her money or men to fight the war, so why not the US do it for her. It's all politics.

Home Land Security

was an original idea from Hitler. Hate to say that, but uhm,, urgh,, ta ta ta

Bush and Hitler are nothing alike. Hitler came to power in unique circumstances, like the war reparations and treaty of versaille. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of Hitler and his rise to power know that they are completely different.

For those of you that watch CNN and think that the US's interest with Iraq is freeing the Iraqi people, think again. There are still countries in the world embroiled in civil war that are in much worse shape and could use the help. Do you think their interest is in the dangerous Saddam Hussein, leader of a country bombed back to the 18th century not too long ago? Do you think he is "poised to strike" with his non existant army? He would have to invade the US by cargo ship since he has no Navy and there's a "no fly zone" over his own country.

Do you think the US wants to spend billions in tanks, bombs, bullets, wages, fuel etc etc to save Iraq? Hell no. The US doesn't spend its defense budget on compassion. It "invests" it. The US will only use its military for its own political or economic gain, as it should be. Anything else would just be pissing away taxpayer dollars for zero reason. Just like any other country.

Think about it. Kuwait is lead by a dictator. Why didn't the US bring the good people of Kuwait democracy? Or Libya? Syria? Saudi Arabia? Brunei? Yemen? Etc etc etc.

I think Bush just wants to get the US people accustomed to their soldiers going around the world and shooting the fuck out of things. That's cool. But come on, spare me this "we're freeing Iraq" bullshit.

More than approves - he creams his pants just thinking about it.

Now listen:
1.
Yes, Bush is there not for oil. Though this is not the last reason for him to begin war. It's difficult for the USA to get into the oil market, because the buyers are in Europe. Getting the iraq oil would ease the question of transportation.

2. Bush is dumb ass. His rating is low. During the elections his numeral superiority was minimal. SO? So he needs to raise his rating. What's the best way to do that? WAR. The best and the only way.

3. May be you don't know about that, but the US economy is going down. There is a definite oversaturation of some products. One of the easiest ways to raise the economie - sell a lot of goods with a minimal prime cost, and a rather high market cost. Like water.
After the appeal to buy fresh water and batteries (and some other stuff) your goverment earned enough to keep all up for a month or two. Then they'll start making money from war.
Yes, war = money. Not for people of Iraq.
Bush is not Hitler. He is not smart enough, and his interest in this war is way too different.

Ok

Yes, all the oil buyers are in Europe, lets not forget the mass consumption of oil in Ethiopia, which is just a hop and a skip away from Iraq. Them fuckers consume almost 80% of the worlds oil supply, camels do get thirsty for oil, not often, but when they do watch out, they can be some mean sons of bitches. Ever had a camel kick you in the ass? Not good.

Correct again, he was once rated high with numeral superiority at the Stardust in Vegas but that didnt last more than a few years.

Hmmm....didnt know about that. Are you gaining access to some of the governments secret computers to obtain this info?

I for one have yet to lose my appeal to buy fresh water and batteries, hopefully others feel the same so we can keep the government going for another month or two because it really needs to keep going, at least until they start making money from the war.