Hans Blix: War Planned Long in Advance - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

wonton · 04-14-2003, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CDSmith
So many people have been railing and crying against the US and the "pre-emptive nature" of the war for so many weeks, all mostly without facts backing up their arguments. Imagine for a second what the world would have been like during the years 1939 to 1945 if the US and the UK + all other allies had of gone against Hitler in a pre-emptive manner, like Bush is against Saddam.

Think about it.

While Hitler is gaining power, stockpiling weapons, tanks, subs, planes, size of army etc, the world goes in and removes him from power. WW II isn't fought across 3 continents but on German soil ONLY. THINK of the savings in lives that would have made.

Is saddam equal to Hitler? Maybe not, but he has certainly shown Hitler-like traits over the years, and I for one am very happy that we won't ever have to find out just how far ol' Saddam would have gone with his power trip.

Oh please..... Saddam circa 2003 is in no way comparable to Hitler circa 1939. Saddam had NOTHING just a rag-tag army armed with sandals and bean bags. His country was utterly destroyed after the 1991 Gulf War and 12 years of super-punishing sancations. He was not a threat to the US or the world. What a fucking joke. The biggest media-created paper tiger in the history of the world. In 2003 Saddam could not even launch an attack against Gilligan's island and expect to win. He was completely TOOTHLESS yet the American government and media made him out to be this dangerous super-villain on the scale of Lex Luthor. The rest of the world saw through the joke. When will Americans?

sacX · 04-14-2003, 07:53 PM

people were only asking to let the inspector do their jobs. A few more months, not years, not 6months. 3 max. Would that have been so tough? nope just expensive.

Thing is US hawks didn't care about the inspectors in the first place.. It was always about regime change, not WMD. They should have just been honest about it in the first place.

Joe Sixpack · 04-14-2003, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wonton
In 2003 Saddam could not even launch an attack against Gilligan's island and expect to win.

So true.

BVF · 04-14-2003, 07:57 PM

where's the "who fuckin cares" picture of gary coleman when you need it?

CDSmith · 04-14-2003, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wonton
Oh please..... Saddam circa 2003 is in no way comparable to Hitler circa 1939. Saddam had NOTHING just a rag-tag army armed with sandals and bean bags. His country was utterly destroyed after the 1991 Gulf War and 12 years of super-punishing sancations. He was not a threat to the US or the world. What a fucking joke. The biggest media-created paper tiger in the history of the world. In 2003 Saddam could not even launch an attack against Gilligan's island and expect to win. He was completely TOOTHLESS yet the American government and media made him out to be this dangerous super-villain on the scale of Lex Luthor. The rest of the world saw through the joke. When will Americans?

Please pull the plug out of your ass so your brain can breath.

There is already so much that has been posted on this board or written in news articles on ALL the news sources covering the war that refute every single one of your objections. I utterly lack the desire to lay it all out for you yet again. It seems that nothing short of having some "Saddam Hussein-like" individual causing WW III would ever convince people like you to wake up. People who choose to wear blinders rather than show some dick in support of those who are risking their lives to protect them are very pitiful people.

FATPad · 04-14-2003, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sacX
people were only asking to let the inspector do their jobs. A few more months, not years, not 6months. 3 max. Would that have been so tough? nope just expensive.

Thing is US hawks didn't care about the inspectors in the first place.. It was always about regime change, not WMD. They should have just been honest about it in the first place.

Umm...I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but it was 12 years ago that he was ordered to disarm.

People have been asking for the inspectors to do their job for over a decade.

Would it have been so tough for him to cooperate 12 years ago? Was he in fact required to cooperate 12 years ago?

I'm not sure why people keep acting like there is no prior history and saying things like, "it's only 3 months" when in fact it has been 12 years *already*.

And what would happen if he didn't cooperate for 3 months? Would the UN do what it always did which was nothing? Then everything is back at square 1 yet again and the pattern of Saddam playing the UN and the world like a piano goes on.

CDSmith · 04-14-2003, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FATPad
I'm not sure why people keep acting like there is no prior history and saying things like, "it's only 3 months" when in fact it has been 12 years *already*.

Because those people are brain-dead.

sacX · 04-14-2003, 09:16 PM

*rolls eyes*
for God sakes the vice only went back on Iraq 3-4 months ago. Weapons inspectors had only just been readmitted.

If it's been 12 years then why couldn't you wait 3 more months.

CDSmith do you ever say anything slightly intelligent. All I see from you is insults whenever someone doesn't agree with you. Does it hurt when you think?

directfiesta · 04-14-2003, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sacX
*rolls eyes*
for God sakes the vice only went back on Iraq 3-4 months ago. Weapons inspectors had only just been readmitted.

If it's been 12 years then why couldn't you wait 3 more months.

CDSmith do you ever say anything slightly intelligent. All I see from you is insults whenever someone doesn't agree with you. Does it hurt when you think?

CDSmith is a fucking Canadian.... lol

uno · 04-14-2003, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SpaceAce

It doesn't matter what you say now. The <B>fact</B> is that out of one side of your mouth, you tell people what they hear in the media is bullshit and out of the other you point directly to that same media machinery to back your own points.

Here's a newsflash for you: just because they report something that fits your personal opinions doesn't make it true and just because they report something you don't agree with doesn't make it false.

SpaceAce

Just because some things are lies and propaganda(spin) doesn't mean everything is.

uno · 04-14-2003, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ChrisH

Hans Blix made it very clear that Iraq wasn't cooperating in full. His first report was really a scathing blast of the Iraqis. His next two were a little better but he made it clear that they were no in full compliance.

I say them all. Not once did he say that Iraq was in full compliance. Not once. And I think we can safely say that Blix, and Al Baridi were no mouth piece for the US.

He did, however, state several times that they did allow full unfettered access.

uno · 04-14-2003, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wonton

How many UN resolutions has Israel failed to comply with?

If we went by UN resolutions, Israel would be #1 on the list.

At least 6 in 2002 alone.

uno · 04-14-2003, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CDSmith
So many people have been railing and crying against the US and the "pre-emptive nature" of the war for so many weeks, all mostly without facts backing up their arguments. Imagine for a second what the world would have been like during the years 1939 to 1945 if the US and the UK + all other allies had of gone against Hitler in a pre-emptive manner, like Bush is against Saddam.

Think about it.

While Hitler is gaining power, stockpiling weapons, tanks, subs, planes, size of army etc, the world goes in and removes him from power. WW II isn't fought across 3 continents but on German soil ONLY. THINK of the savings in lives that would have made.

Is saddam equal to Hitler? Maybe not, but he has certainly shown Hitler-like traits over the years, and I for one am very happy that we won't ever have to find out just how far ol' Saddam would have gone with his power trip.

First off its BS and a cheap shot to play off emotions by equating anything to Hitler considering most view him as the pinnacle of evil.

People can draw connections anywhere with examples like that for either side.

The situation in Iraq bears little resemblance to a WW2 Germany as does the situation domestically in america and its leaders.

uno · 04-14-2003, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FATPad
Umm...I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but it was 12 years ago that he was ordered to disarm.

People have been asking for the inspectors to do their job for over a decade.

Would it have been so tough for him to cooperate 12 years ago? Was he in fact required to cooperate 12 years ago?

I'm not sure why people keep acting like there is no prior history and saying things like, "it's only 3 months" when in fact it has been 12 years *already*.

You've never read/heard about/seen footage of the large stores of weapons/facilities destroyed during the first rounds of inspections?

UnseenWorld · 04-14-2003, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sacX
[BIf it's been 12 years then why couldn't you wait 3 more months. [/B]

One extremely compelling reason is that both both biological and chemical weapons tend to work better on warmer weather, not to mention that the suits required for protection can themselves become lethal to the wearer when the ambient daytime temperatures drift up into the 100's. THAT is why it couldn't wait three more months, and besides what kind of person would actually believe that Saddam would wake up one morning in the next three months and stop playing his shell game, saying "Okay you got me: here is where my WMD's are"...a smart person or a dumb one?

directfiesta · 04-14-2003, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UnseenWorld

One extremely compelling reason is that both both biological and chemical weapons tend to work better on warmer weather, not to mention that the suits required for protection can themselves become lethal to the wearer when the ambient daytime temperatures drift up into the 100's. THAT is why it couldn't wait three more months, and besides what kind of person would actually believe that Saddam would wake up one morning in the next three months and stop playing his shell game, saying "Okay you got me: here is where my WMD's are"...a smart person or a dumb one?

Quote:

Reality Check: Where are the weapons of mass destruction?
CBC News Online | April 10, 2003

...
In Kuwait on March 20, after the war in Iraq began, the country was bracing for an imminent chemical attack, an attack that never came ...

...
Why is it taking so long to find them? Some suggest it's because so many weapons were destroyed before the war.

Ron Cleminson, a Canadian member of the UN weapons inspection commission, says, "We knew we had 817 of 819 scuds; we had destroyed 40,000 chemical weapons."

In other words, the inspections were working, something the UN inspectors were insisting just two weeks before the war started. ...

But that was not fast enough for George Bush, who maintained war was the only option. "Time is running out on Saddam Hussein? he must disarm. I'm sick and tired of games and deception," Bush said.

Even though the Bush administration has been caught in its own deceptions. The U.S. insisted it had proof Iraq was trying to buy uranium for a nuclear bomb, but the documents themselves were false.

Mohamed ElBaradei, the chief nuclear inspector, told the UN Security Council "These documents that formed the basis for recent uranium transactions between Niger and Iraq are in fact not authentic."

Ron McGovern, a former CIA analyst, asks if there are weapons, why have military commanders put finding them on the backburner?

..McGovern also says if Saddam Hussein had weapons he would have used them.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/iraq/issues_a...eck030410.html

One phrase is clear: "But that was not fast enough for George Bush, who maintained war was the only option"

sacX · 04-14-2003, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UnseenWorld

One extremely compelling reason is that both both biological and chemical weapons tend to work better on warmer weather, not to mention that the suits required for protection can themselves become lethal to the wearer when the ambient daytime temperatures drift up into the 100's. THAT is why it couldn't wait three more months, and besides what kind of person would actually believe that Saddam would wake up one morning in the next three months and stop playing his shell game, saying "Okay you got me: here is where my WMD's are"...a smart person or a dumb one?

No one was saying Saddam was going to give up his weapons. It was about trying to get more concensus, to try and convince more of the international community that going in was the right thing to do. If the US had more patience and shown some respect they would have added a lot more legitimacy to the invasion.

What you're saying about chemical and biological weapons being more effective in the heat is just untrue. They are LESS effective. Increased temperatures increase the evaporation rate of chemical weapons, and the UV light increases degradation of biological agents..

wonton · 04-14-2003, 10:37 PM

Directfiesta's CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) quote says it all.

Bravo!

South Park: The Movie was wrong. Canadians are A-Okay in my book!

At least the CBC is willing to call it like it is.

directfiesta · 04-14-2003, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wonton

South Park: The Movie was wrong. Canadians are A-Okay in my book!

Quote:

We'll never forget hearing our Canadian neighbors sing the Star Spangled Banner at a Memorial Service for those murdered by terrorists, seeing a child's drawing of the US flag with "God Bless America" scrawled next to it, the woman who ran around the counter and hugged us when she learned about our origins. On the last leg of our flight to New York, the plane was silent as we flew by Manhattan. Smoldering remnants of the carnage were still in the air. This wasn't the stuff of movies or a CNN broadcast from some far off land. This was home.

On the day of our return, The Canadian government ran a message to Americans in the New York Times. "Canadians share the loss of loved ones and friends. On Friday our nation mourned with you for the victims of the terrorist attacks. We share your outrage, grief, compassion and resolve. The people of Canada are with you every step of the way. As friends. As neighbors. As Family." The hospitality and support we received in St.John's, New Foundland in our time of need is proof of the sincerity of these kind words. You're great neighbors.

Thank you, Canada.

Tom Reilly,
Fairfield, Connecticut

http://www.cbc.ca/interact/us_letters.html

playa · 04-15-2003, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by wonton

You seem to be missing the point entirely, which is not surprising. The art of propaganda is to SPIN THE TRUTH, no blatantly broadcast all-out lies.

Geez,, if you read all the US news headlines you'd think the US was getting their ass kicked, Hell the pentagon has all the bitched about the negative press,,

lets start with some subjects

War pauses, failed plan being rewritten
Troops moving too fast supply to thinned
Massive civilian causulties
Iraqi people not happy

Now i am hearing today that CNN is underfire for lying about the situation in Iraq so saddam will let their reporters stay

The western media has way to many different sources. their are literally thousands of different news sources.

Now if there wasn't any reporters on the field and we was only getting news from the pentagon and daily war briefing than yes i would believe their would be possible propaganda. but time after time we get the latest news first then the pentagon will have to explain not the other way around

scooby doo as scooby does · 04-15-2003, 02:09 AM

What I find most depressing about a lot of these posts is not that people are pro-war. Wars for resources such as oil have been going on for centuries, I'm depressed because so many people seem to actually swallow the 'looking for WMD' or 'free the Iraqis' bullshit. It's like they have to justify it by lying.

I'm trying to decide whether these people are truly as stupid as they sound, or merely following the propaganda because they think it will somehow help their troops/country. At least the latter has some merit, however misguided.

This is about oil and the US government isn't even trying to hide it that much, hence the money/troops/businesses already setting up to run the oil fields.Whereas US help for hospitals, humanitarian aid etc. is fucking conspicuous by it's absence.
Apparently the oil fields need to be solely run by the US, whereas humanitarian aid, hospitals, schools, needs to be run by the UN... oh yeah. Duh!

Everything Blix said just confirms all this.

Forget the words, look at the actions!

galleryseek · 04-15-2003, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by scooby doo as scooby does
What I find most depressing about a lot of these posts is not that people are pro-war. Wars for resources such as oil have been going on for centuries, I'm depressed because so many people seem to actually swallow the 'looking for WMD' or 'free the Iraqis' bullshit. It's like they have to justify it by lying.

I'm trying to decide whether these people are truly as stupid as they sound, or merely following the propaganda because they think it will somehow help their troops/country. At least the latter has some merit, however misguided.

This is about oil and the US government isn't even trying to hide it that much, hence the money/troops/businesses already setting up to run the oil fields.Whereas US help for hospitals, humanitarian aid etc. is fucking conspicuous by it's absence.
Apparently the oil fields need to be solely run by the US, whereas humanitarian aid, hospitals, schools, needs to be run by the UN... oh yeah. Duh!

Everything Blix said just confirms all this.

Forget the words, look at the actions!

who gives a flying fuck???

if the war is about oil, then good, least we'll jump on oppurtunity when we see it, and in the process make iraq a better place to live rather than it being ran by a man who enjoys murdering / raping / torturing his own people.

04-14-2003, 07:57 PM	#54
BVF Black Vagina Finder Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The Midwest Posts: 13,975	where's the "who fuckin cares" picture of gary coleman when you need it? __________________ Black Pussy Click On Mr Cosby..CCbill, 60/40, 136 FHG's....The Cos Loves Black Ghetto Pussy!!

04-15-2003, 02:09 AM	#71
scooby doo as scooby does Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: A deep dark place. Posts: 314	What I find most depressing about a lot of these posts is not that people are pro-war. Wars for resources such as oil have been going on for centuries, I'm depressed because so many people seem to actually swallow the 'looking for WMD' or 'free the Iraqis' bullshit. It's like they have to justify it by lying. I'm trying to decide whether these people are truly as stupid as they sound, or merely following the propaganda because they think it will somehow help their troops/country. At least the latter has some merit, however misguided. This is about oil and the US government isn't even trying to hide it that much, hence the money/troops/businesses already setting up to run the oil fields.Whereas US help for hospitals, humanitarian aid etc. is fucking conspicuous by it's absence. Apparently the oil fields need to be solely run by the US, whereas humanitarian aid, hospitals, schools, needs to be run by the UN... oh yeah. Duh! Everything Blix said just confirms all this. Forget the words, look at the actions! __________________ In 1904, Charles Newman-Berry connected two abacus's together using specially enhanced GrapeVine thus inventing the first Internet connection. NEWMAN-BERRY CASH Paying webmaster since 1904 Last edited by scooby doo as scooby does; 04-15-2003 at 02:12 AM..

04-14-2003, 07:53 PM	#52
sacX Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: New Zealand Posts: 2,998	people were only asking to let the inspector do their jobs. A few more months, not years, not 6months. 3 max. Would that have been so tough? nope just expensive. Thing is US hawks didn't care about the inspectors in the first place.. It was always about regime change, not WMD. They should have just been honest about it in the first place.

04-14-2003, 09:16 PM	#58
sacX Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: New Zealand Posts: 2,998	rolls eyes for God sakes the vice only went back on Iraq 3-4 months ago. Weapons inspectors had only just been readmitted. If it's been 12 years then why couldn't you wait 3 more months. CDSmith do you ever say anything slightly intelligent. All I see from you is insults whenever someone doesn't agree with you. Does it hurt when you think?

04-14-2003, 10:37 PM	#68
wonton Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 802	Directfiesta's CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) quote says it all. Bravo! South Park: The Movie was wrong. Canadians are A-Okay in my book! At least the CBC is willing to call it like it is.