Soapbox: The Saddam issue

[62_Kiwi]

I'm disgusted with the majority of world leaders - who are failing to give support to the U.S. in taking out Saddam.<br /><br />How safe do they imagine the world will be once Saddam is nuclear armed ? How will anyone contain his power and aggression once he can threaten to nuke anyone who stands in his way ?<br /><br />Does it take a terror attack involving nukes and/or biological weapons on a major western city, with massive casualties - before they will see it as proper to act ?<br /><br />How will history judge these so-called "leaders" after an event like that ? A bit like the ones who opposed taking action against Hitler I suspect.<br /><br />Good on the Australian and British governments for supporting the U.S.A. ( edited 4th Sept ) <br /><br />Shame on the others that don't.<br /><br />Sorry guys, I just had to get that off my chest.

 

[crab bait]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

USA the world's police force .. the good ole cop on the beat.. <br /><br />every body hates us 'till they need us..<br /><br />there's countries that owe everthin' to us they turn there backs on us..<br /><br />like BUSH says ... <br /><br />your either with us or again us...

 

[Beernutz]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

Thanx, Kiwi.<br /><br />Whichever way it goes, it won't be pleasant. I'm with you, though. The sooner, the better.<br /><br />Y'all are a tough bunch, down there. A lot like those that founded our country. We respect that, and appreciate your support.

 

[gonfishn]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

What ever they do I hope they finish it no matter what the cost or sacrifices we need to make. In my time I have been in Countries where the Mere whisper of freedom would get you Killed. Our freedom is to precious to let these fanatics dictate our way of life......<br /><br /> Proud to have served........

 

[Moose_Miller]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

X

 

[gonfishn]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

Your right on time with this one MM. What Sadam is trying to cook up now has been in our barrels for longer then he has had Electric. Uncle Sam has stuff that can wipe out cities that won't even disturb a Blade of grass. What our Gov. Shares with us today is already out dated and they have moved on to bigger and better Mousetraps. What I don't understand is we destroy their infrastructure then turn around and spend billions helping them rebuild.....<br /><br /> Makes no sense to me.........

 

[Fishbusters]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

Okay we are now gonna take out the man we put in power to begin with HMMMMM. Sounds as if we should not have put him there in the first place. Regardless of that we had the chance once and realized what a mistake it would be to go in and depose him by force. You must look at the climate of the whole area and who you will offend by doing what you are about to do. Some of those folks are even crazier than old Sadam and have more stuff to back it up. I am not saying he does not need to be put down like a rabid dog but lets make sure we get all the rabid dogs and don't get bit ourselves.

 

[88spl]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

I think once we fire on oh Saddam, other nations will join in with us (France, England,Germany). It is what happened when we went in back in Desert Storm. We have alot of backing today, we just don't hear it.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

Saddam should have been taken care of the first time around. Politics kept the job from getting done correctly.<br />I fully expect we'll fail to do the correct thing again.<br /><br />We might as well gear up for some pretty heavy fighting for the next 15 years. <br />It won't take long after we get involved throughout the Islamic world, WITH Israel, that China and its allies will want Taiwan back. India and Pakistan will have their own side show. US with our ever present allies can have us a fine World War of the third type.<br /><br />I think a dose of an isolationist policy, say for at least 25 years would be a multi pronged approach to get our own affairs in order.<br />We and our politicians are pretty corrupt right now.<br />Think of it, we've been sending lawyers (politicians)around the world to do our business and the last 50-75 years of them are corrupt lawyers. They've done every foul deed and deal that can be done while tossing the Constitution and US under the stinking bus along the way!<br />The twin towers were our latest payment.<br /><br />Simple.<br />Follow our Constitution.<br />IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU OR I ANY RIGHTS.<br />IT SIMPLY AND EASILY TELLS MY GOVERNMENT WHAT IT CAN'T DO. IT ONLY PLACES RESTRICTIONS ON OUR GOVERNMENT.<br />STOP the indoctrination otherwise.<br /><br />(BTW, our Constitution only allows a military for defense, not as a world police department....sorry.)<br /><br />Don't do ANY business with ANY country that isn't fair to its own citizens.<br />Don't allow bad people into our country. <br />Develop our own technology using our own resources.<br />Produce ourselves what we consume and consume what we produce. What isn't possible to produce and the excesses we do, buy low and sell high. <br />Use our diverse human resources developing ways for other countrys to do the same. Sell, or better yet povide them with what we learned in that 25 years.<br /><br />"Either you're with us or agin' us" is meaningful language. However, out of the mouths of politicians it doesn't mean much. <br />Socialist, Communist, Fundamentalist, Capitalist, left/right, leave it up to a politician to do the wrong thing.<br /> <br />Citizen and Patriot.

 

[Bob_VT]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

Real Estate. All the battles throughout history boil down to real estate issues.<br /><br />As a veteran of Viet Nam, Grenada, Desert Storm and a volunteer during Enduring Freedom it is all basically the same. Fortunatley the attitude of the world has swung to becoming more pro military and the awareness has risen along the years.<br /><br />I am retired now and limited to the volunteer status however Sadam is not the issue.....it is the principal we are battling.<br /><br />Bob

 

[wvit100]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

Iraq. What exactly is the reason that we are talking about attacking them. Bush says something about them developing nuclear or chemical weapon, maybe its biological? This hasn't been anything but talk yet,have you seen any proof. Supposedly he had these weapons during the Gulf War, but he didn't use them. If he was anywhere close to getting nuclear weapons wouldn't it be pretty evident, with the testing required and the facilities needed to manufacuture them. The only time he has used chemical weapons was against his own people and that was 12 or so years ago. And then what exactly is our plan after invading a country that hasn't actually threatened anyone for almost 10 years. Do we stay and set up a government, turn it over to Isreal, just kill Sadam and leave, what? Maybe as long as our army is there we can just go ahead and get rid of some other leaders we don't like. <br />It's a pretty big step to go in a start invading countries because of something they might do sometime in the future. Have you seen the new movie Minority Report, they go in a put people in jail for crimes they haven't actually committed yet. We all know some people we don't think are good people. Maybe we should go ahead and shoot them cause we're sure they'll do something bad soon.<br />None of the terrorists on Sept. 11 came from Iraq, a bunch came from Saudi Arabia. Shouldn't we go ahead and be attacking them instead.<br />I know Sadam's a bad leader for Iraq. But so are the leaders in Columbia, Pakinstan, North Korea. Maybe Bush should put together a hit list. <br /><br />Hey we could just take over the world. Then I'm sure everything would run the way we wanted it.

 

[DaleT]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

I don't care for the idea of invading Iraq. This is based on a singular idea, Saddam is an ego-maniac. In otherwords, he loves himself more than he hates "us." In my opinion, he won't resort to nuclear, chemical, or biological warfare unless he is forced to, most likely by military force. <br /><br />Is his a perilous regime? Certainly, yet it doesn't cause many real problems. By that I mean, other than not allowing UN inspectors full access there haven't been many problems since Desert Storm.<br /><br />On a side note it is absolutely ridiculous that some countries governments are publicly bashing this movement.<br /> <br />I don't know if I'm seeing all the angles of this issue but this is my view on the whole thing.

 

[Moose_Miller]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

X

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

I like the option of helping the people of Iraq<br />overthrow him, not us. there are plenty of ways<br />to get him removed without invading.<br />the best point made so far was getting rid of our<br />dependance on oil. if the world stopped buying oil<br />they would all lose their ONLY real source of<br />income along with a bunch of other unfriendly countries...... <br />no money, no power.<br />will probably never happen though.<br />my .02<br />M.Y.

 

[SCO]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

The Sept attack changed everything. We know that they will not stop their escalation. It will be Nukes etc. next, and they are not going to let us avoid this fight. I don't think this has much to do with fairness or provability or fault at this point. You all make good points and who can know how each scenario would actually turn out. Sometimes you just have to decide on a course of action and execute it. I have to trust that our President has the best info. and tools to give him the best shot at making the best decisions.

 

[wvit100]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

SCO,<br /><br />You trust Bush to make a decision, based on what? <br /><br />Let's see, lately he said that evidently it is all those pesky trees in the forests that cause fires. We should just let the lumber companies cut them down and we won't have any more problems with fires. <br /><br />Basic rights to a fair trial and the right to face your acuser. Not if the government doesn't want you to, they can lock you up forever without ever seeing a court or a lawyer if they say it is in the interest of national security. Who says it is a national security interest, the government does. That's pretty convinent. Sounds a lot like the old Soviet Union doesn't it, imprisoning people for some vague crimes.<br /><br />I just hope that the Senate has enough backbone to ask some hard questions and make the administration answer a lot of questions before comitting young peoples lives to fighting a war without spelling out what the goals are or how we are going to end it.

 

[amtsst]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

The only sad thing about all of this, WVIT100 is that local law prevents me from shooting your communist *** .<br /><br />"no proof" OH HECK...I guess 2500 dead Kurds weren't enough. OH WAIT. Let me guess. You don't believe that Saddam killed some of his own people. Well too bad. He did it. 20% of Iraq has ethnic Kurds which are different from the Sunni moslems who inhabit the central part of the country. Saddam figured he'd kill two birds at once. Test his new toy AND kill Kurds. <br /><br />Weapons Inpsections? PLEASE. The United Nations team didn't get to inspect ANY sites in Iraq without 3 days notice. Gee. I wonder what Saddam did for three days before each inspection? Hmmm...I'll have to think about that one for a minute. <br /><br />Next. If the Bush administration says they have proof, then I believe it. There's a reason we have military and intelligence classifications of "TOP SECRET". Its becaus we don't want others to know how good our information is. If the administration told the American Public every time they found out something, then that source of info would disappear immediately. Have you ever heard of Enigma? If so, then you know what I'm saying. If you don't, you are a complete BONEHEAD. <br /><br />I bet you also believe in greater gun control and think that we should ban capital punishment.<br /><br />OH...and on the forest fire thing. Consider these options:<br /><br />1. Regular log and then replant trees. This creates jobs and provides for regular regeneration.<br /><br />2. Let trees fall down, pine needles pile up, so that forest fires will have more to burn.<br /><br />Know what I had for lunch? Spotted Owl. It tastes like chicken. Dinner is going to be Humback Whale. Its a little greasy but very tasty when fried.

 

[SCO]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

I dont agree with the lumber policy either, but it is a new twist on prescribed burning. Forest fires are naturally occuring and we prevented them for a long time. I've also got concerns about civil rights violations, but think it normal for times of war. Prior to all this, the Japanese-American roundup of WWII seemed unfathomable. I think he has the benefit of history to help him chart his course. He saw the results of the actions of Bush 41, and I'm not blaming 41. We went the coalition route and he had his hands tied. 43 is not going down that road. Besides, 41 thought he could isolate him...inspections etc. and it didn't work. 43 knows that. Bush has seen the terrorism expansion which was not confronted from '92 to 2000. That didn't work. Can we just pull out of there and go isolationist? I don't know. Sounds appealing. That's what we wanted to do and were doing prior to our involvement WWII. Maybe we have to fight for the oilfields else lose our ability to defend ourselves and keep the machinery of the country operational. I think he has all that info and a lot more. It may be that waiting and not acting would be what ends up costing the most lives. I am not Hawkish at all in the sense of anger or justification or revenge . This is too grave for that. I am afraid for all of us and our armed forces. This is one where I don't want to change anyones mind cause I don't know what the right course of action is and am not privy to enough info to make the decisions.

 

[SS MAYFLOAT]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

Hmmm, We could use this situation in our behalf. We need a place to put nuclear waste, Iraq wants nuclear, so lets give them all the radioactive material that is useless to us. We clean up the states, and they will glow in the dark. Eventually they will need the towels on their heads to prevent sunburn for when their hair falls out!<br /><br />Our country has stuff the common person can't even comprehend. Everyone says there will be lots of lives lost if we do this. Well, that has been said during our last attempt with Iraq. We lost people due to friendly fire, but we lost more here in the states in auto accidents. Auto accidents have even killed more than what has been killed in Vietnam. WE WILL KICK THIER A$$ WITH NO QUESTIONS ASKED!!!!

 

[wvit100]

Re: Soapbox: The Saddam issue

Backwater,<br /><br />I guess your just one of those "your either with us or against us" kind of guys.<br /><br />I own guns (pistols, rifles, and shotguns), I hunt, fish, and boat, I keep the American flag that covered my uncle's coffin during his military funeral flying on the wall in my computer room, I have been a registered Republican since I was 24 years old (18 yrs ago), I know the difference between a tree farm and a natural forest, and I don't take kindly to some YaHoo calling me a communist.<br /><br />Open you little peanut mind up a bit. Watch and listen to the news and ask yourself some questions, does what they are telling you make sense. Oh, and by the way, Rush Limbaugh is not news, he's an entertainer.<br /><br />If no one questioned the people in authority we would all still be flying the British flag and singing God Save the Queen. So don't tell me I don't love my country.