|
||
|
Title: Iraq Post by SteveY on Aug 6th, 2002, 7:04am This is a political post, not sure its allowed but here goes. The view generally in the UK is that all avenues be explored before a war with Iraq sorry Saddam is begun. UN weapons inspectors in etc etc. In the UK we only hear the views of the extremities of American opinion i.e Nuke 'em and don't do anything. My question is what are the views of 'Middle America' I apologise if this post upsets anyone, but for me another September 11 must be avoided at all costs. My own view is explore options, but if there is any doubt as to Saddam having a strike capability, he should be taken out ASAP. Just interested in what 'normal Americans' think. PFDAN Steve |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by don on Aug 6th, 2002, 7:34am Simple. Reverse the non elimination policy of the CIA, take out Sadam quickly and quietly and topple the regime. Should take about one week. Remember the Iraqi army surrendering to news reporters? Read between the lines. |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by williamsmh on Aug 6th, 2002, 8:07am I personally hate war and would love to avoid it all costs. Unfortunately.... our world doesn't work that way. If Saddam is going to kill innocent people then he needs to be stopped. I am definately not for nuclear strikes (too hard on the rest of the world and the innocent people). But Saddam needs to be stopped if there is a chance he will do anything. Mark |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by sailpappy on Aug 6th, 2002, 10:08am I agree with Mark, nuclear weapons should be banned from the planet, the possibility of a preemptive strike and a retalitorial strike are all together too real, and the damage to the planet is on a scale with a new Ice Age. We have the technology and manpower to go in and take him out physically and the longer we wait the stronger his chances are of obtaining both nuclear and biological weapons of mass destruction. This is reminnecent of Viet Nam to me, Pacification zones and the like, many many friends of mine died needlessly there because the government never put forward an effort to win the war, only to sustain it until a dipomatic decision could be made to abandon those innocent people that made the mistake to depend on the strongest free nation in the world to defend them and save them from a life of communistic tyriany. Suddam has proven time and time again that he will continue in his avenue to kill all of us infidel dogs. In the name of a god? I just don't understand why we didn't finish the objective in the first go round, because as sure as the sun rises we will have to return to do it all again, and in the meantime we are allowing him to dictate to us the conditions by which he will try to destroy us, keep waiting and he will gain an advantage that will make Sept 11th look like a celebration! Just my humbol opinion %100 disabled Viet Nam Veteran John J Hallahan III aka Pappy :-/ |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by BobG on Aug 6th, 2002, 10:30am I say kill the bastard. We can sort out the names later. |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by TomM on Aug 6th, 2002, 11:38am The more I think about this the more I'm inclined to let the bastard live and allow him to annihilate the mid east. As long as he does not touch American soil, ignore him. I can't see spending the $$$, time, and American lives to remove him. If we do remove him, who then, will run the country? His brother? I think the US would have a moral responsibiltiy to help with some form of government but I do not want to see our tax dollars spent there. We can be much more productive with $$$ spent on US soil. On the other hand, he does have biological and chemical weapons and is feverishly trying to develop nuclear weapons. He has destroyed his own people. Do we wait a few years as we did with Hitler? Tough questions. --Another veteran--TomM-- |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by gtarman on Aug 6th, 2002, 1:52pm Pappy- If we DO go in there, we'll need a better plan than we had in 'Nam, for sure. We sure as hell don't need to have, as Country Joe Mcdonald put it so long ago, "your boy come home in a box" unless we get the job done right, completely, and quickly. We bailed out too early last time because of political/oil considerations and to not piss off countries like Saudi Arabia, who can all kiss my ass. However, I think we should take Saddam up on his site inspection offer before going to war. This is how we do it: We want to inspect site A. Saddam says no, we can't inspect that site. OK, we say, no problem. Then about 15 minutes later, site A goes KA-BOOM! Then we say, OK, we wanna inspect site B... |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by TomM on Aug 6th, 2002, 2:50pm All of this will be determined by how many countries we 1) want to piss off. 2) care whether we piss them off. 3) how high we can go on gasoline (crude oil) costs. Jordan is one of very few allies we have over there but from what I've read and watched, they won't be too happy about us marching in the sand so close to them. Sadam may be a egomaniac dictator from our vantage point but let us not forget he is one of the mideasts' brethren. GtarMan, your plan to inspect Iraq's sites is good but dangerous. We really need to WORLD community behind us before we march "Over hill, over dale". I just wish the UN had bigger balls...I mean guns. My biggest concern is the waste of American lives. Nothing is more precious than the life of a loved one. Sending people to battle is easy to do from the comfort of your living room in front of your big screen TV. I'm a veteran but have never been to war. From what I've been told by vets I know who have been to war, it's friggin' nasty. --TomM-- |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by tommyD on Aug 6th, 2002, 3:02pm I like your inspection idea, gtarman, but I agree with TomM's reservations... And it simply isn't good policy to go invading any country we don't happen to like...especially if there hasn't been a direct and overt attack on us...turning on a radar station is NOT an attack...Wily ol' Saddam just likes to see us fire off millions of dollars worth of missiles to blow up some old obsolete radar set. And sorry Bob, but asassination is not good foreign policy. Tends to blow back on ya. Some say our attempts to assassinate Fidel resulted in the death of JFK...I know, just conspriacy nuts, but are you sure they're wrong? My conspiracy theory of the week...somebody's polls are dropping and a nice war would boost them back up... -tommyD |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by TomM on Aug 6th, 2002, 4:09pm The sun is just like his father; looking for the boost of popularity except he is not quite as bright. --TomM-- |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by jimbo on Aug 6th, 2002, 6:20pm OK OK bottom line on the Iraq situation. #1 Only 18% of the oil that the U.S consumes is from the middle east. #2 I watch TV and see the people cheering in the streets for this Mother Fucker . scuse the language. #3 The only reason that they are cheering for this not a very nice person is because he has them convinced that we are the enemy. (Sanctions etc.) They are friggin starving and the children are not getting the medical attention that they deserve (Because of him) but then again neither are most of us clusterheads. Most of the people of Iraq are ignorant of the real situatuin because all they know is what they are told. i.e the U.S is the devil etc. I say "Lets inject a CH into this not a very nice persons cranium and see how long he lasts" I give him 10 minutes and he'll be screaming for Allah to take him to his 72 virgins. I'm in no way way trying to make fun of anyones religion, but anyone who kills people in the name of religion is one sick person. #4 If it costs me another 18% for gas just to get rid of this idiot, It'll be worth it. #5 Drastic times call for drastic measures. Lets load up B-52's with pork sausage and bars of Irish Spring and drop it on Iraq. LMAO End of discussion... "Kind of a peaceful solution anyway!" Seeya, Jimbo |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by 2late on Aug 6th, 2002, 6:36pm the sick bastard needed taken out 10 years ago,not only is Iraq a terrorist breeding ground,I think we'll all find out he had something to do with 9-11,he's also close to having nuke capability & he sure as hell will use it!!! |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Donna on Aug 6th, 2002, 7:20pm Yer right 2late.......And once he has the capability, there's no stopping him. I just wonder who is his first target? |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Donna on Aug 6th, 2002, 7:21pm Yer right 2late.......And once he has the capability, there's no stopping him. I just wonder who is his first target? |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by jonny on Aug 6th, 2002, 7:41pm I saw the Doc today and got Imitrex, first time he gave that to me it should help me in Vancouver seeing that I wont have my 02. but then again I got tons of zomig. Oppps!!!, wrong message board.....SORRY!!!!! ............jonny |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Donna on Aug 6th, 2002, 7:52pm Still glad to hear it jonny.................now Wake Up. Love, Donna |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Charlie on Aug 6th, 2002, 8:06pm Saddam only has to fire off a cruise missile. I don't know a way to stop one. Maybe we can, but it’s doubtful. It may be like WWI, Inevitable. Damn sad state of affairs. I believe the first thing he will do if he can, is attack Israel. If he does, Sharon & company will not sit still. This is different from last time. Once we get enough stuff there; and this kind of thing takes a lot of time, I suspect we’ll use it. I’m out of ideas. Really sad old Charlie |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by jonny on Aug 6th, 2002, 8:28pm "Now wake up"?, Donna I didnt know this board was the CNN of the internet. Kinda thought this MB was for information and support of CH. Am I wrong? I think you should wake up and bring this issue to where it belongs and that is not this fucking board. Dont you agree? .................jonny |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by sailpappy on Aug 6th, 2002, 8:33pm ;D ;D Garsh TommyD, Don't you know anything about history, everyone knows that it was JFK's attitude towards Blacks and minorities that caused the good old boys to do him in, I'd almost bet the farm that LBJ and his henchmen set JFK up and used Martin Luther King as a skathgoat to take the blame for it! I wasn't very old when all of this crap went on but I remember the day JFK was assinated like it was yesterday, I cried real tears in open for the first time ever on that day, and the more closely I looked the more it smacked of a conspirisay and coverup! JFK let Fidel know he meant business about pulling the missles out of there positions that's all! Pappy :o |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Donna on Aug 6th, 2002, 8:42pm OK jonny, sometimes (?) I'm pretty dense. Now I get your point. You just have to spell it out to me, like you did. |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by jonny on Aug 6th, 2002, 8:47pm Shut up, Donna. You know I love ya. .....................jonny |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by williamsmh on Aug 6th, 2002, 8:54pm Saddham is one person I might wish clusters on! It might slow him down a little. Mark |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by sailpappy on Aug 6th, 2002, 9:13pm ;D ;D OK Jonny, So we drifted a little off the subject of clusters to hemmeroids, that aint not reason you ya to make Ms. Donna feel like the heel, she didn't start the thread Dude! Look at it like this, reverse clusters, instead of talking about a cure we are talking about a way to cause someone to get them! Severe chronic like 20 a day with an alergy to every known medication except maybe a Black Beret's Bullet to the old frontal lobe! You know one of those armour peircing 2000pound one's Pappy so like STFU Dude! |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by paul_b on Aug 6th, 2002, 11:41pm The fact that the world does not isolate this evil being says a great deal about the nature of us humans. Self interest is deeply rooted; looking after the well-being of others is a saintly act. Kinda like what we do for each other on this board. PFDAN "all" |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Ted on Aug 6th, 2002, 11:56pm Far be it for me to ever get into a political discussion on this board. But I figured I'd join in anyway, completely lost on how Jonny made Donna feel like a heel. The point has been made that if we go in there a lot of other nations, such as Jordan, will be upset (relying on the words they give to supporters) and we'll be seen as colonialists if we do. BUZZ. That's like saying back when Israel bombed the shit out of an Iraqi reactor where they were developing nukes back in the 80s, and the whole world officially condemned Israel, once again, meant it, that unofficially they weren't happy that they took that weapons power plant out. Here it will be the same thing. The world is looking towards the hegemonic power to do what needs to be done. Sure they'll condemn us, officially. But the reality is they want us to do it too. Back to Jordan. We aren't going to invade, conquer and implement a western-type nation there. We'll do the job, get small-nuked for doing what no other nation has the balls to do, and Jordan will have a good say how the next regime is put in place and who it will be. For that reason alone they back it, unofficially. We've been starving the children of Iraq and negating their ability to recieve medical care. Bullshit. We've been saying follow the rules of the world. He says no and tells the world our sanctions kills millions of children. Well, they do. And that is literally depressing. Why does he need to let those children suffer and die to protect his nuclear weapon program. If he's willing to allow so many children to die so he can avoid weapons inspectors, if he's willing to slaughter so many children with his biological weapons that he's used, what is the argument against taking him out? That Americans will come back in body bags? Is it preferable that the same people and many others die right here in our own country for any reason? Is it better that they don't come home in body bags but are already home when they're stuffed into it? I say go after him. Stop this insanity once and for all. But this time let CNN and the rest in. I am calling for a massive war and sending in troops to do it. I'm also calling on our press to go in and tell me and show me JUST what the costs of me advocating it means. No more "precise bombing" news coverage is allowed! |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by rick on Aug 7th, 2002, 12:29am I wish peace for all the souls that are about to be lost. |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Scotty_Dog on Aug 7th, 2002, 1:10am First of all, Thank you sailpappy for serving my country, even in a BS Conflict that you were destined to lose, and thank you to all the VETS who served, in war and peace. I remember the outrage that this country felt when 9-11 happened, and now I see too many people forgetting the horror of that day, concerned with gas prices and how other countries will feel. We live in the greatest country that has ever existed on this planet, and we take that great gift and forget the responsibility that comes with it. Like it or not, we have fallen into the role of policing the world and it is our job, or nobodies, to bring an end to dictators like Saddham and Terrorism. We need to stop letting Israel take all this heat for defending themselves, which is exactly what we are doing. That makes us look like big bullies who only care about ourselves, and we need to use Special Forces, and the CIA, to take out that dictator, work with Jordon, and stand up a leadership that will serve our purposes, We need to stop being so concerned with oil prices and the ecology of our natural resources. We have more oil under the Gulf of Mexico than all the Middle East nations combined. The forest need to be harvested so huge forest fires can be avoided, and we need Doctors will backbones that will prescribe medications because they work, and not because they are getting a cut from the Pharmacy Rep who tells them to prescribe the new, expensive crap that does nothing but give you side effects that you need to go back to the doc for to get more expensive crap to counter act! (Man, I wonder where my thoughts are) Anyway, God bless you all, and especially, all you VETS, and remember what Tomas Jefferson said, “Without the shedding of blood, there is no freedom” ;D |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Ted on Aug 7th, 2002, 1:35am LOL Rick. That's a rather bland and s.h.eepish opinion, don't you think? I don't think many here have called for the eternal damnation of all souls who fight on either side. |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Ree on Aug 7th, 2002, 8:24am Now, now Ted if I wrote that you would have thought it was nice... (referring to rick's comment) I agree with Ted something has to be done... but this stuff scares me. I would preferr that CNN stop warning and telling our enemies that "We're coming and how we are going to do it and when". I also agree with jonny (imagine that) dont they have an IRAQ message board to argue this one on... I hate when you guys get all passionate about war and politics. I know ... SHUT UP REE |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by TomM on Aug 7th, 2002, 8:43am Ted--you remind me of Jack Nicholson from 'A Few good Men'--"You want me on that wall. You need me on that wall..." Jonny--glad to read you are still the same, my friend. Believe it or not, sometimes some of us discuss other topics not related to CH's. LOL. SailPappy--Have I said 'Thanks" to you lately? Thank you for doing what so few have been asked, many more these days refuse, and returned safely to tell us about it. Jimbo--IMHO, you are right on target. Scotty_Dog--"We need to stop being so concerned with ...the ecology of our natural resources" Wow! --TomM-- |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Slammy on Aug 7th, 2002, 11:47am 1st off, I think jonny showed great restraint ( for him) :D and clever subtleness in his post. I started to write a post along the same lines but gave up due to that damn internal server error message. Think about it... If everyone started to post their views on world events, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation ( ok, maybe that's ok ;) ), this board would be inundated with BS that has absolutely nothing to do with Clusters....! I'm sorry, if I wanted to rant on these subjects, I would go to a MB that caters to them, at least the people there are knowlegeable and passionate on that subject enough to be there! When I log on in here, I could give a fuck about Iraq, and I'm sure most, if not all, could give a rat's ass what my thoughts are, on Iraq! but, hey, then again..that's just me! Slammy 8) |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Drk^Angel on Aug 7th, 2002, 11:50am This thread reminds me of something someone told me a long time ago, and that I've decided to adopt for myself... I don't discuss religion or politics with my friends, because I have lost too many friends that way. PFDAN........................ Drk^Angel |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by rick on Aug 7th, 2002, 12:03pm Ted, Not at all. My personal opinions have already been expressed by others who have already posted on this thread, there really isn't much for me to say. And I didn't state that anyone was calling for the damnation of souls. You are reading a little to deeply into a very simple statement. There are a tremendous number of lives which are about to be lost on both sides of the conflict, primarily many innocents on the other side. That is tragic from a human perspective any way you look at it. I do agree that taking out Saddam is a better option than watching the city I live in be transformed into a large non-hallucinogenic mushroom. So again, I wish for peace for all the souls that are about to be lost on both sides, as well as for all those lost on Sept. 11th, and for all those killed in Afghanistan. Have a good one, -Rick |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Ted on Aug 7th, 2002, 12:40pm Man, you all. Calm down. I would have figured my starting it out by writing "LOL" would have been a BIG clue that I was only joking around. |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by ECV_XPBC on Aug 7th, 2002, 3:22pm Going after Saddam is inevitable. Whether it be on our own preemptive terms, or his terms (use of bio-chem weapons), or his use of nukes. The isolationists can have it their way, in which case we're talking option 2. But let's face it, if this camel jockey uses nukes, he does it once only - and we won't allow Israel to respond in kind - we'll do it for them using tac-nukes that will not only take him out but also his infrastructure. Saddam's use of strategic nuclear weapons won't be a unifying force in Arab/Islamic world, but will provide his neighbors and the West the necessary reason to hunt him down like the rabid dog he is. This is no Afghanny guerilla hunt - Saddam couldn't survive a week in caves of Tora Bora; too much elitist pampering. Pay now - pay later, why procrastinate!!!! Sandman |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Charlie on Aug 7th, 2002, 5:29pm Getting there is half the fun. We're working at it. It would be nice if that were all it took. Unfortunately, this guy is a nut and not like the Russians. He has nowhere to go and it's up to the West to hurry him along before he takes too many more with him. It would be nice if this were enough. Unfortunately these guys never seem to go away for good. We are the good guys. That we spend time worrying about it is evidence of this. Sorry Jonny. I was compelled to keep this going. That mean old Charlie |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by mark_david on Aug 10th, 2002, 11:15am CIA TAKE OUT SADAM U.S. OUT OF U. FUCKING N. PNDAN MARK DAVID HOEBENER |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Jack on Aug 10th, 2002, 12:11pm I was staying out of this one but I can't sit still while that Bible Belt, Shotgun Toting, Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition. Born Again and Again, Fundamentalist Pip Squeak DEN spews his hatred. We need to leave Iraq alone and invade Panama again!! or maybe Haiti or Uruguay or Swaziland Love Jack |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by Not4Hire on Aug 10th, 2002, 1:03pm (quote) ........leave Iraq alone and invade Panama again!! or maybe Haiti or Uruguay or Swaziland ........ (unquote) Sounds like a Dubya/Texan/Bush plan to me: runs in the family....Warrus Interruptus...... kick a little ass, leave the head... why oh why did they stop short of Baghdad? IMNSHO........just invade SWITZERLAND...(leave Ueli alone tho....) and we'll have most these bastidges by the short and curlies (read bankroll).... where it hurts the worst...... might as well get the Caymans while we're at it.....i think that's where BobP stashed the OUCH money ;D |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by BobG on Aug 11th, 2002, 12:29pm A little up-date to ScottyDog. We did not lose the Vietnam war. In 1972 the war effort was turned over to the South Vietnamese to do battle. At that time the US pulled out the troops. Saigon fell in 1975. The American forces were not there. It's hard to lose a war when you're not there. The "We lost the war" mentality is only in the minds of the anti-war freaks that refuse to read history and gather facts. |
||
|
Title: Re: Iraq Post by jonny on Aug 11th, 2002, 12:52pm FUCK'IN A, BOB!!!!! ....................jonny |
||
|
Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1! YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved. |