GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   What is there not to understand about the US over throwing Sadam (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=103820)

theking 01-31-2003 03:00 AM

What is there not to understand about the US over throwing Sadam
 
I posted all of these in multiple threads and decided to put them all together. To me it is easy to understand why we are going to overthrow Sadam and of course is no more than my considered :2 cents:

Quote:


Originally posted by theking


Reasons for war.

#1. Iraq was defeated on the field of battle and signed certain terms. Iraq has been in violation of those terms since they signed the terms in '91. The USA has demanded that those terms be complied with and that Iraq remain a defeated country.

#2. Iraq attempted to assasinate a former American President.

#3. Iraq has fired upon, almost daily, for almost 11 years, USA military forces.

#4. Iraq is believed to have, or are acquiring, or are attempting to acquire WMD's. The USA will not allow that.

#5. Iraq has, on multiple occassions called for Americans, to be killed where ever they are found. Thus they are a sworn enemy of the USA.

#6. Iraq is a strategic piece of real estate for future military operations against our enemies in the region, which number in the 100's of millions.

#7. Iraq is a strategic piece of real estate for its oil fields and for the surrounding oil fields, for as the worlds oil supplies dwindle the USA will be in a position to control the dwindling oil supplies for its use and the use of its European allies.

#8. A take over of Iraq sends a very powerful signal to the other countries in that area of the world that if they don't get their act together they will be next.

Any one of the reasons above is a reason for war.


Quote:

Originally posted by theking


Proof of WMD's

During the first round of inspections after after the first gulf war, Iraq admitted that they had x number of tons/liters etc. of different types of chemical and different types of biological materials on hand as well as x number of chemical rockets/artillary rounds. The first round of inspections over saw the destruction of much of this material and weapons, but they were not allowed to finish the job. Iraq has now said that they took it upon themselves to destroy the remaining weapons and materials since 1998. They do not have the documentation to prove this and said that they destroyed the documentation when they destroyed the materials and weapons. Even if it were true that they destroyed the documentation of the destruction of the materials and weapons there would still be the physical evidence of the destruction of the these materials and weapons, which they have failed to present evidence of. There would also be those scientists and engineers etc. that would have been involved in the destruction of these materials and Iraq has failed to present these people that would have been involved in the destruction of the materials and weapons. Bottom line is they had chemical and biological materials and weapons, admitted that they had them, the first round of inpsections oversaw the destruction of much of the materials and weapons, but they were kicked out before the remaining materials and weapons were destroyed, and Iraq has yet to present one iota of proof that they in fact took it upon themselves to destroy the remaining chemical and biological materials and weapons, thus without proof that they did in fact destroy them (which is their burden as imposed in the last UN resolution) we the US and anyone with an ounce of brains must assume that they still have them, and may have even produced more of them since 1998.

Quote:

Originally posted by theking


Some reasons why we may not be presenting clear cut proof to the UN, our "allies" and the world public.

I of course do not know what crystal clear proof may or may not exist such as photographs, but I do know that if we have black and white proof and presented that proof (even in secret to "allies") that information would have a good chance of being leaked and what are now targets would be dispersed and hidden so the opportunity to take them out will have been lost and as a result they could be used against our forces.

It has been reported that our CIA and military have outlined more than 700 targets to be hit, many of which are suspected, if not factually known to store chemical, biological materials or weapons. If we began to present this target list to the UN or to the world public or even to some of our "allies" those targets would not exist when it came time to attack them as they would have been cleaned of whatever they may now contain.

Quote:

Originally posted by theking


We are not going it alone.

The President does not act in a vacuum and cannot act without the backing of the American people, which he has, the backing of congress, which he has (they gave him the thumbs up on Iraq several months ago), the backing of his cabinet, which he has, the backing of the justice department and the courts (the President cannot violate the constitution or the law), which he has, and at this point in time he has the backing of the UN Security Counsel (15-0). Nine countries at this point in time are committing troops, twenty-two other countries are offering other types of support. There will be more come on board before all is said and done. If I remember correctly there were only 38 countries that either committed troops and/or other types of support in the first gulf war. At this point in time we have the committment of 31 countries and counting.

:2 cents:

LiveDose 01-31-2003 03:03 AM

Some people are just idealists or they don't like Bush. Those are the only valid reasons in this case...

KRL 01-31-2003 03:08 AM

People just have a very hard time accepting the immense wealth, worldwide power, and miltary might that the United States possesses and wields.

Its understandable. When you're the guy on top everyone below you wants to knock you down.

I mean heck all we want to do is control the whole planet. Is that asking too much? :1orglaugh

theking 01-31-2003 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by KRL
People just have a very hard time accepting the immense wealth, worldwide power, and miltary might that the United States possesses and wields.

Its understandable. When you're the guy on top everyone below you wants to knock you down.

I mean heck all we want to do is control the whole planet. Is that asking too much? :1orglaugh

Someone tonight called the US an empire and of course many countries call us imperialists. Could someone inform me what the last country was that we added to our empire?

EscortBiz 01-31-2003 03:48 AM

why waste talking about this, noone here can change anything if the president wants war there will be war regardless of GFY posts and talkshow bullshit

Scott McD 01-31-2003 03:51 AM

Edit

Mr.Fiction 01-31-2003 04:11 AM

Pathfinder has a theory that if he starts enough threads about the exact same thing then maybe someone will care about his brainwashed Rush Limbaugh posts.

Brainwashing by repetition may work on you, but it doesn't work on everyone.

Keep trying, though. :)

DarkJedi 01-31-2003 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking
I posted all of these in multiple threads and decided to put them all together. To me it is easy to understand why we are going to overthrow Sadam and of course is no more than my considered :2 cents:

:2 cents:


http://eru.cx/gfy/shutupbitch.gif

theking 01-31-2003 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction
Pathfinder has a theory that if he starts enough threads about the exact same thing then maybe someone will care about his brainwashed Rush Limbaugh posts.

Brainwashing by repetition may work on you, but it doesn't work on everyone.

Keep trying, though. :)

Feel free to point out any mistatements. I do not listen to Rush, I am not now, nor have I ever been a fan of Rush. By the way Pathfinder no longer has any theories about anything and :321GFY you for your shitty remark.

Vendot 01-31-2003 10:12 AM

Carries a high risk. I read this report in full but I think it understates the risks:

http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.u...fings-Iraq.htm

Honeyslut 01-31-2003 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction
Pathfinder has a theory that if he starts enough threads about the exact same thing then maybe someone will care about his brainwashed Rush Limbaugh posts.

Brainwashing by repetition may work on you, but it doesn't work on everyone.

Keep trying, though. :)

Theking is democratic so he sure as hell would not be listening to Rush Republican Limbaugh.


:Graucho

theking 01-31-2003 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by vendot
Carries a high risk. I read this report in full but I think it understates the risks:

http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.u...fings-Iraq.htm

Of course there are risks. Some will balance the scale of "risks" one way and others will balance the scale the other way.

mjrools23 01-31-2003 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction
Pathfinder has a theory that if he starts enough threads about the exact same thing then maybe someone will care about his brainwashed Rush Limbaugh posts.

Brainwashing by repetition may work on you, but it doesn't work on everyone.

Keep trying, though. :)

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

playa 01-31-2003 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by vendot
Carries a high risk. I read this report in full but I think it understates the risks:

http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.u...fings-Iraq.htm


these people kill me,, i quote from their site

Quote:

evidence of Iraqi military tactics in 1991
shows that the survival of the regime is the core policy
and that chemical and biological weapons are almost certain to be used, certainly against attacking troops and possibly against targets in neighbouring countries;

WTF,, i thought the anti-war people don't believe the Iraqi's have WMD???

theking 01-31-2003 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Honeyslut


Theking is democratic so he sure as hell would not be listening to Rush Republican Limbaugh.


:Graucho

"Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot", was an amusing book.

Rich 01-31-2003 01:17 PM

I still don't believe you're not Pathfinder, but I agree with you here. I can't wait for the day they start the invasion, the sooner the better.

slackor 01-31-2003 01:29 PM

Ask Bush, all I see on the news is "time is running out" and "enough is enough" yet Bush does nothing....

Hawkeye 01-31-2003 01:30 PM

When Iraq actually attacks the United States, only then will war be justified, mmmmkay?

Paul Markham 01-31-2003 02:57 PM

#1. Iraq was defeated on the field of battle and signed certain terms. Iraq has been in violation of those terms since they signed the terms in '91. The USA has demanded that those terms be complied with and that Iraq remain a defeated country.

I think the surrender terms were to the United Nations not the United States.

#2. Iraq attempted to assasinate a former American President.

Prove it and show the proof

#3. Iraq has fired upon, almost daily, for almost 11 years, USA military forces.

They were flying over Iraqi air space and had the effect of a flea on an elephant.

#4. Iraq is believed to have, or are acquiring, or are attempting to acquire WMD's. The USA will not allow that.

Believed in not enough. Prove it and show the proof

#5. Iraq has, on multiple occassions called for Americans, to be killed where ever they are found. Thus they are a sworn enemy of the USA.

No freedom of speech from you then.

The US is saying lets go kill Iraqi's.

#6. Iraq is a strategic piece of real estate for future military operations against our enemies in the region, which number in the 100's of millions.

Plus it has lot's of oil, getting close to the truth here.

#7. Iraq is a strategic piece of real estate for its oil fields and for the surrounding oil fields, for as the worlds oil supplies dwindle the USA will be in a position to control the dwindling oil supplies for its use and the use of its European allies.

Getting very close to the truth here.

#8. A take over of Iraq sends a very powerful signal to the other countries in that area of the world that if they don't get their act together they will be next.

A simple answer from some one who has been watching to many Bruce Willis movies.

Iraq is a soveriegn state and like it or not you cannot just invade a country and kill people because you do not like them. You need to prove they are a threat beyond reasonable doubt before you start to execute people.

This will not be a war that will be won in a few weeks of carpet bombing and a quick military land assault. Afghanistan has proved that. If Bushes record on there is anything to go on he should stay out of interrnational politics.

This is not something that will be won in a few weeks, after the defeat of Iraq, which the extremist want, the terrorist will use it as propoganda to recruit kids to do their dirty work. You do not win this kind of war by killing people.

Don't believe me? Look on a map and see where Islam is the major religion and then go to the local "Catholic Irish" bar and ask their opinions on Protestants. That war only went on for a few hundred years. And the Protestants did everything they could to put the Catholics down.

Bush thinks he can open Pandoras box and close it again in 6 months. The man is a fool. That is more frightening than Sadaam.

FATPad 01-31-2003 03:05 PM

If the United States is so wrong, why aren't France and Germany sending troops to help defend Iraq?

Why isn't anyone sending troops to help defend Iraq?

Surely the rest of the humanitarian countries who hate to see small, little, helpless countries, trampled mercilessly by tyrannical war machines bent on world domination like the US would never stand by and let an aggressor with no reason invade someone.

digi 01-31-2003 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FATPad
If the United States is so wrong, why aren't France and Germany sending troops to help defend Iraq?

because unlike the usa most other nations have a diffrent policy then "either you are with us or against us".

FATPad 01-31-2003 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by digi


because unlike the usa most other nations have a diffrent policy then "either you are with us or against us".

So you like to claim the US is invading people for no good reason, but refuse to help the "innocent" country defend themselves from unwarranted aggression?

Geez. That's not nice.

playa 01-31-2003 04:02 PM

Listen people you guys need to study history

it's pre WWII all over again

same shit people say now is what they said back then,

the whole time the world believed hitler didn't have no weapons

everyone wanted to "appease" the germans,,

even damn France could of prevented WWII it if they took action



and bout afghanistan,, charly i believe it only took a few hours to kick the taliban out,

we go in now it'll be just like gulf war all over again

kenny 01-31-2003 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by charly
#1. Iraq was defeated on the field of battle and signed certain terms. Iraq has been in violation of those terms since they signed the terms in '91. The USA has demanded that those terms be complied with and that Iraq remain a defeated country.

I think the surrender terms were to the United Nations not the United States.

#2. Iraq attempted to assasinate a former American President.

Prove it and show the proof

#3. Iraq has fired upon, almost daily, for almost 11 years, USA military forces.

They were flying over Iraqi air space and had the effect of a flea on an elephant.

#4. Iraq is believed to have, or are acquiring, or are attempting to acquire WMD's. The USA will not allow that.

Believed in not enough. Prove it and show the proof

#5. Iraq has, on multiple occassions called for Americans, to be killed where ever they are found. Thus they are a sworn enemy of the USA.

No freedom of speech from you then.

The US is saying lets go kill Iraqi's.

#6. Iraq is a strategic piece of real estate for future military operations against our enemies in the region, which number in the 100's of millions.

Plus it has lot's of oil, getting close to the truth here.

#7. Iraq is a strategic piece of real estate for its oil fields and for the surrounding oil fields, for as the worlds oil supplies dwindle the USA will be in a position to control the dwindling oil supplies for its use and the use of its European allies.

Getting very close to the truth here.

#8. A take over of Iraq sends a very powerful signal to the other countries in that area of the world that if they don't get their act together they will be next.

A simple answer from some one who has been watching to many Bruce Willis movies.

Iraq is a soveriegn state and like it or not you cannot just invade a country and kill people because you do not like them. You need to prove they are a threat beyond reasonable doubt before you start to execute people.

This will not be a war that will be won in a few weeks of carpet bombing and a quick military land assault. Afghanistan has proved that. If Bushes record on there is anything to go on he should stay out of interrnational politics.

This is not something that will be won in a few weeks, after the defeat of Iraq, which the extremist want, the terrorist will use it as propoganda to recruit kids to do their dirty work. You do not win this kind of war by killing people.

Don't believe me? Look on a map and see where Islam is the major religion and then go to the local "Catholic Irish" bar and ask their opinions on Protestants. That war only went on for a few hundred years. And the Protestants did everything they could to put the Catholics down.

Bush thinks he can open Pandoras box and close it again in 6 months. The man is a fool. That is more frightening than Sadaam.


Its Iraqs job to prove they have destroyed those weapons, I dont know about you but I for one dont want a mass murderer dictator having enough bio/chem weapons to kill millions. And BTW what country do you think pays the burden of funding the UN?

Honeyslut 01-31-2003 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking


"Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot", was an amusing book.

Rush is correct about the majority of people who live in Rio Linda.. :1orglaugh

ChrisH 01-31-2003 06:32 PM

If Europe had their way Kuait would still be under Iraqi control, and we'd be waiting for the Sanctions to REALLY kick in. :1orglaugh

Like I said yesterday, if the Inspectors were kidnapped today they wouldn't beleive it. :thumbsup

BigFish 01-31-2003 07:23 PM

U.N. inspection girls are being toyed around like little bitches in IRAQ: http://msnbc.com/news/867105.asp?0cl=c1

Ridiculous how most of Europe is being sucked in by IRAQ's propaganda war.

theking 01-31-2003 07:38 PM

Originally posted by charly
#1. Iraq was defeated on the field of battle and signed certain terms. Iraq has been in violation of those terms since they signed the terms in '91. The USA has demanded that those terms be complied with and that Iraq remain a defeated country.

I think the surrender terms were to the United Nations not the United States.

The United States was, is and has been the enforcer of those terms.

#2. Iraq attempted to assasinate a former American President.

Prove it and show the proof

It was world wide news during the Clinton years. If you are really interested do your own search.

#3. Iraq has fired upon, almost daily, for almost 11 years, USA military forces.

They were flying over Iraqi air space and had the effect of a flea on an elephant.

The conquerer was imposing its will upon the conquered (to prevent the conquered from killing its own people). The USA and Britain should have removed Sadamn when they were first fired upon.

#4. Iraq is believed to have, or are acquiring, or are attempting to acquire WMD's. The USA will not allow that.

Believed in not enough. Prove it and show the proof

Read my initial posts. 1441 requires Iraq to prove (it is not the inspectors role to prove, not the UN's role to prove, not the USA's role to prove that they haven't destroyed them) that they destroyed the remaining WMD's that they had previously admitted to having and were left undestroyed when the first round of inspectors left in 1998. They have failed to do this.

#5. Iraq has, on multiple occassions called for Americans, to be killed where ever they are found. Thus they are a sworn enemy of the USA.

No freedom of speech from you then.

The US is saying lets go kill Iraqi's.

Pathetic and ridiculous analogy and not worthy of lengthy rebuttal.

#6. Iraq is a strategic piece of real estate for future military operations against our enemies in the region, which number in the 100's of millions.

Plus it has lot's of oil, getting close to the truth here.

#7. Iraq is a strategic piece of real estate for its oil fields and for the surrounding oil fields, for as the worlds oil supplies dwindle the USA will be in a position to control the dwindling oil supplies for its use and the use of its European allies.

Getting very close to the truth here.

#8. A take over of Iraq sends a very powerful signal to the other countries in that area of the world that if they don't get their act together they will be next.

A simple answer from some one who has been watching to many Bruce Willis movies.

All of the above are reaons for war. You may not like the reasons but they are all reasons for war. All of these reasons were outlined in response to a post made by someone that stated there are not any reasons for a war.


Quote:

Iraq is a soveriegn state and like it or not you cannot just invade a country and kill people because you do not like them. You need to prove they are a threat beyond reasonable doubt before you start to execute people.

This will not be a war that will be won in a few weeks of carpet bombing and a quick military land assault. Afghanistan has proved that. If Bushes record on there is anything to go on he should stay out of interrnational politics.

This is not something that will be won in a few weeks, after the defeat of Iraq, which the extremist want, the terrorist will use it as propoganda to recruit kids to do their dirty work. You do not win this kind of war by killing people.

Don't believe me? Look on a map and see where Islam is the major religion and then go to the local "Catholic Irish" bar and ask their opinions on Protestants. That war only went on for a few hundred years. And the Protestants did everything they could to put the Catholics down.

Bush thinks he can open Pandoras box and close it again in 6 months. The man is a fool. That is more frightening than Sadaam.
The invasion of Iraq will be over with quicker than the last Gulf War and the USA will have in hand the surrender of Iraq's military and control of the government. That of course is when the real battle begins (the winning of the hearts, minds and developement of a democratic republic) and will be long term.

GTS Mark 01-31-2003 07:39 PM

http://www.ehowa.com/pic/bushposse.jpg

:winkwink:

DH

J-Reel 01-31-2003 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BigFish
U.N. inspection girls are being toyed around like little bitches in IRAQ: http://msnbc.com/news/867105.asp?0cl=c1

Ridiculous how most of Europe is being sucked in by IRAQ's propaganda war.


Sounds like the evidence is there and will be presented.

.:Frog:. 01-31-2003 09:14 PM

There is a serious chance Saddam burns more oil this time. Infact if the US is hellbent on taking out Saddam, why wouldn't he burn it?

theking 01-31-2003 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by .:Frog:.
There is a serious chance Saddam burns more oil this time. Infact if the US is hellbent on taking out Saddam, why wouldn't he burn it?
I suspect that he will attempt to initiate whatever is at his disposal regardless of its military necessity or viability. That is of course if he has the balls to stand his ground and does not flee the country. There are reports that he had a retrograde plan in place during the first gulf war just in case we decided to invade Iraq.

ChrisH 02-01-2003 12:53 AM

HELLBENT................

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Babaganoosh 02-01-2003 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DrinkingHard
http://www.ehowa.com/pic/bushposse.jpg

:winkwink:

DH

:thumbsup

theking 02-01-2003 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by J-Reel



Sounds like the evidence is there and will be presented.

Unfortunately not to the satisfaction of the haters of the USA.

jimmyf 02-01-2003 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking


Feel free to point out any mistatements. I do not listen to Rush, I am not now, nor have I ever been a fan of Rush. By the way Pathfinder no longer has any theories about anything and :321GFY you for your shitty remark.

For some odd reason Mr.Fiction is under the impression that 90% plus of the USA listens 2 Rush.:uhoh

DarkJedi 02-01-2003 10:16 AM

http://eru.cx/gfy/x-files.jpg

theking 02-01-2003 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmyf
For some odd reason Mr.Fiction is under the impression that 90% plus of the USA listens 2 Rush.:uhoh
He probably has this impression because he listens to it.

Honeyslut 02-01-2003 02:09 PM

rush=background noise

DaLord 02-01-2003 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BigFish
U.N. inspection girls are being toyed around like little bitches in IRAQ: http://msnbc.com/news/867105.asp?0cl=c1

Ridiculous how most of Europe is being sucked in by IRAQ's propaganda war.

13 million people died during WW2.
No fucking wonder why some people here in Europe don't like war in ANY form.

I don't like war either but I'm wise enough not to talk about the situation cause all I know about this upcoming war comes from TV. That means I can't have an objective idea about what to mean or say. But you seems to know a lot about it mister senator or are you just referring to what the Tv stations are telling you?

Mike
User.nix

Webby 02-01-2003 04:47 PM

*Bush administration to release tapes that could incriminate Iraq. ?Hold onto your hat,? says one U.S. intelligence official, ?we?ve got it.?*

*LOL* I won't bother holding on to my hat and waiting for the "evidence" - Much was promised many months past and what have we got? Still nothing. Kinda makes ya sick reading all these crap stories leaked from a "US intelligence official" with zero credibility.

Reckon it is long overdue to cough up or shut up :winkwink:

Webby 02-01-2003 05:04 PM

"If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the United States of America." "What I am condemning is that one power, with a president who has no foresight and who cannot think properly, is now wanting to plunge the world into a holocaust. Why does the US behave so arrogantly? Their friend Israel has got weapons of mass destruction. But because it's their ally they won't ask the UN to get rid of them." "It is a tragedy what Bush is doing in Iraq. All he wants is Iraqi oil. We must expose this as much as possible. He is making the greatest mistake of his life by trying to cause carnage." -- Nelson Mandela


"I can't understand how an intelligent man like Tony Blair can listen to a moron like George Bush." - Denis Halliday, UN Chief Humanitarian Co-Ordinator


Some *deep* self-examination, a triple script load of "humilty pills" and "get-what-little-brain-I-have-working" tablets might be in order. It might also be handy if Bush actually served, (yea, "served" - it ain't an easy word in Washington), the people who elected him - and those who didn't on his "non election".

Nuff said!

psyko514 02-01-2003 05:08 PM

i think webby's got the idea.

sure, over throw saddam, but leave iraq alone.
their just a bunch of peons being egged on by their leader for fear of being executed.

why do iraqis harbour ill feelings towards the states? because saddam tell them to.

TurboTrucker 02-01-2003 05:23 PM

That's a contradiction. You can't get rid of Saddam without affecting Iraq.

Quote:

Originally posted by psyko514
sure, over throw saddam, but leave iraq alone.

TurboTrucker 02-01-2003 05:38 PM

"Despite Saddam Hussein's biochemical assaults on Iranian troops and his own Kurdish population in the 1980s, his invasion of neighboring Kuwait in 1990, his repeated threats against Israel and the U.S., and his decades-long commitment to building a secret doomsday arsenal, he now poses little threat to the world, according to Halliday"

Wow this Halliday guy sounds like a real genius.



Quote:

Originally posted by Webby

"I can't understand how an intelligent man like Tony Blair can listen to a moron like George Bush." - Denis Halliday, UN Chief Humanitarian Co-Ordinator

Nuff said!


theking 02-01-2003 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TurboTrucker
"Despite Saddam Hussein's biochemical assaults on Iranian troops and his own Kurdish population in the 1980s, his invasion of neighboring Kuwait in 1990, his repeated threats against Israel and the U.S., and his decades-long commitment to building a secret doomsday arsenal, he now poses little threat to the world, according to Halliday"

Wow this Halliday guy sounds like a real genius.




Kind of like the genius Webby???

FATPad 02-01-2003 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TurboTrucker
"Despite Saddam Hussein's biochemical assaults on Iranian troops and his own Kurdish population in the 1980s, his invasion of neighboring Kuwait in 1990, his repeated threats against Israel and the U.S., and his decades-long commitment to building a secret doomsday arsenal, he now poses little threat to the world, according to Halliday"

Wow this Halliday guy sounds like a real genius.




HAHA

Madball 02-01-2003 08:08 PM

Saddam and his entire regime must die. Period.

All 70s hippies are wrong with their peace bullshit. "OH ALL THE CIVILIANS WILL DIE IN WAR". Morons, Saddam is killing people on a daily basis since 25 years. He doesn't give a shit about his own people. He killed 50k innocent Kurds in 1996 with poison gas in Northern Iraq. In 2002, 500k Iraqi children died of malnutrition. "OH BECAUSE OF THE EVIL EMBARGO". Bullshit, cause Saddam invests the little cash he makes in his palaces and his army + weaponry.

Next in que should be those fuckers in Sudan.

Webby 02-01-2003 08:12 PM

theking:

*Kind of like the genius Webby???*

Yea? A genius? Mmm.. I did not know this, but hell... thanks, I'll always value your considered thought! :Graucho

Reckon most of the world must be in my category of "genius" in not accepting the Bush doctrine. That favorite US ally, the UK, is now down to 10% in agreement with Bush. :winkwink:

Webby 02-01-2003 08:16 PM

"Next in que should be those fuckers in Sudan."

Fuck me! :1orglaugh


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123