Al Queda Plans
01-29-2003, 11:03 AM
#221
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A reminder on Clinton Policy
Remeber when Clinton made the same argument in FAVOR of conflict? NO ONE said anything from the left then. Maybe they weren't paying attention because the President that they liked was in power.............
When Clinton was making the argument he said:
"The president said the Balkans are a crucial area and history justifies U.S. involvement.
"Remember that we fought two World Wars in Europe," Clinton said. "Remember that the prosperity and peace of the people in Europe is important to the future of the children in this room."
Here is the whole article:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9904/01/us.kosovo.05/
When Clinton was making the argument he said:
"The president said the Balkans are a crucial area and history justifies U.S. involvement.
"Remember that we fought two World Wars in Europe," Clinton said. "Remember that the prosperity and peace of the people in Europe is important to the future of the children in this room."
Here is the whole article:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9904/01/us.kosovo.05/
01-31-2003, 11:26 AM
#222
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you didn't see it on TV
I suggest you read it here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030128-19.html
Tom - here is a good portion of your answer to the question, "where is the evidence" lets not forget, this is certainly not all of it. For Bush to turn everything over to the media would obviously compromise and endanger intelligence sources.
Colin Powell is scheduled to address the nation Wednesday February 5, 2003 to reveal more evidence that the liberals insist he does not have.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030128-19.html
Tom - here is a good portion of your answer to the question, "where is the evidence" lets not forget, this is certainly not all of it. For Bush to turn everything over to the media would obviously compromise and endanger intelligence sources.
Colin Powell is scheduled to address the nation Wednesday February 5, 2003 to reveal more evidence that the liberals insist he does not have.
Last edited by at100plus; 01-31-2003 at 12:34 PM.
02-05-2003, 11:35 PM
#223
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From O'Reilly tonight:
By the end of March Saddam Hussein will not be living in Bahgdad.
The upside to this besides removing Saddam and his weapons of Mass Destruction is:
After removing Saddam, the US will set up effective ground intelligence in the gulf region, making it much more difficult for Al Queda to operate there.
Also US will be poised on the border of Iran and Syria making it much more difficult for those countries to support terrorism.
With US forces on guard in Iraq, it will be much more difficult for Hamas and Hezbollah to continue their murderous rampages.
Saddam's regime is gone, and once things calm down in Israel, a truce with the Palestinians becomes more realistic.
The upside to this besides removing Saddam and his weapons of Mass Destruction is:
After removing Saddam, the US will set up effective ground intelligence in the gulf region, making it much more difficult for Al Queda to operate there.
Also US will be poised on the border of Iran and Syria making it much more difficult for those countries to support terrorism.
With US forces on guard in Iraq, it will be much more difficult for Hamas and Hezbollah to continue their murderous rampages.
Saddam's regime is gone, and once things calm down in Israel, a truce with the Palestinians becomes more realistic.
02-05-2003, 11:53 PM
#224
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the sake of argument, let's say that Saddam Hussein does indeed have chemical and biological weapons somewhere in Iraq. (Leave off the nukes, as the IEIA has bluntly stated that no such program or weapon exists in Iraq) Hussein is and has always been a weapons junkie, and his jones was amply fed by science, training and materials given freely to him by the Reagan administration and a number of prominent American corporations.
One could argue that the best evidence Colin Powell could show the UN on Wednesday is a pile of shipping manifests from 1986, but that is not likely to happen. After all, the American names on those manifests would bear a striking resemblance to current door plaques along the halls of power in the White House and Defense Department. This could present an uncomfortable situation.
UNSCOM basically razed Hussein's weapons program to the ground from 1991 through 1998, taking care of pretty much everything the Gulf War bombs missed. The inspectors wrecked all the equipment and destroyed every missile, bomb and laboratory they could find. They were tantalizingly close to declaring Iraq fully disarmed when the wheels came off UNSCOM in 1998. In the intervening years, no evidence has been put forth demonstrating Iraq's procurement of new weapons development equipment and material, items that are watched very closely. Our satellite technology can read a watch ticking on an arm in downtown Baghdad, and is more than capable of noting whether or not Hussein's soldiers and scientists have been busy in the deserts outside Basra. No such documentation has ever been presented.
Forget all that. Accept the flawed but widely accepted premise that Saddam has these weapons practically falling out of his ears. Let's take a walk down a path to the future.
Powell gives his spiel to the UN, which is so dazzling that a resolution for war is immediately granted. The tanks roll and the jets fly. The 'Shock and Awe' plan developed by the Pentagon and reported on last week by CBS is put into effect - 800 cruise missiles are fired into downtown Baghdad, a city of five million people. Those cruise missiles are followed by a fusillade of 'smart bombs' which will be proven to be 100% accurate because all of them will hit Iraq.
Saddam doesn't quit. His army and security services don't turn on him. The people of Iraq do not rise up either, as they will be busy dying, hiding and mourning. Because we have absolutely no intelligence on the day to day location of Hussein, our rain of weaponry does not kill him. He hangs on, waving his middle finger into the cameras of the Al Jazeera network, which will film this alongside the shattered bodies of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. The necessity of sending in ground troops to finish the job becomes manifest, at which point America will be forced to absorb casualty figures not seen since Vietnam. In the worst case scenario, those troops get bogged down in Baghdad, at which point the newly minted rules for the release of tactical nuclear weapons come vividly into play.
There are two diverging nightmares arising from this entirely possible scenario, both of which arrive at your doorstep. If the worst comes to pass, and our forces use a nuclear weapon to seal the deal and release our troops from the bloodbath of street-to-street combat, it is absolutely certain that Pakistan or Iran, or both, or someone else entirely, will deliver a nuclear weapon into the hands of al Qaeda. When the mushroom cloud goes up in Iraq, all bets are off.
Perhaps more disturbing is the scenario that comes if everything goes completely according to plan. Iraq is a nation that is 97% Muslim, and the civilian casualties that will come from a picture-perfect execution of the American war plan will motivate a shadow army of terrorists who would, under normal conditions, welcome the death of the secular heretic Saddam. This war has nothing to do with dealing with that threat, but it will unleash the fury of that army upon us immediately. They will see the corpses of innocent Muslims, and they will come for us. Here. The front lines of this war will move to your neighborhood and mine.
That is the best-case scenario, and that is the rub. Whether or not nuclear weapons come into play, our incredibly agile and effective terrorist foes will attack us on the home front, should we kill Iraqi civilians. The best laid plans involve this, whether we like it or not. Meanwhile, George W. Bush has done absolutely nothing to make sure we are safe here at home from the inevitable blowback.
The Homeland Security Department has been created, but is still tied in knots trying to streamline communication and interaction between dozens and dozens of intelligence agencies. The same CIA, FBI and NSA that allowed the September 11th attacks to bruise the skies above New York and Washington are still responsible for our safety, and there has been no interior reform whatsoever to solve the security holes that allowed the terrorists to attack us in the first place. The independent investigation meant to cure these ills has gone dark and silent. Our ports, borders and airports are still security sieves. Not one city or town is prepared to handle a biological or chemical attack. Hussein may not have those weapons, but it is entirely possible that al Qaeda does.
In essence, the King is calling for war while his own castle walls lay in ruin around him. The battlefield will not be in some faraway land, but right here, inside the moat.
This is not some mealy-mouthed appeaser argument. This is fundamental tactical analysis, and it says we are not ready for this war. During the entirety of the 20th century, we could feel relatively safe behind our oceans, because the wars always took place on someone else's ground. After September 11th, that changed, and we were not ready for it, and we are still not.
Bear this in mind when you realize that Saddam Hussein has been in office since 1979 and has never, not once, made an aggressive move against the United States. Bear this in mind when you understand that Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, two very viable foes who have actually attacked us, want nothing to do with Hussein because he is a secular dictator who has been crushing Islamic fundamentalism for thirty years. If we attack, those forces will move against us in the name of Iraq. They are, in fact, just waiting for us to move.
Bear this in mind when you consider the inspectors, whose work will eventually uncover any weapons while simultaneously protecting us against terrorist blowback from a war. That's right: The United nations, so denigrated by the Bush administration, is currently working overtime to save your life.
What is this war worth to you? Are you willing to have it come to your city, to your family? It will. Bank on it. The U.S. military may be all set to fight. We as a nation are not at all prepared to defend ourselves against it here at home. Bank on that, as well.
William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times bestselling author of two books - "War On Iraq" (with Scott Ritter) available now from Context Books, and "The Greatest Sedition is Silence," available in May 2003 from Pluto Press. He teaches high school in Boston, MA.
Scott Lowery contributed research to this report.
© : t r u t h o u t 2002
Reprinted from t r u t h o u t:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/020503A.htm
One could argue that the best evidence Colin Powell could show the UN on Wednesday is a pile of shipping manifests from 1986, but that is not likely to happen. After all, the American names on those manifests would bear a striking resemblance to current door plaques along the halls of power in the White House and Defense Department. This could present an uncomfortable situation.
UNSCOM basically razed Hussein's weapons program to the ground from 1991 through 1998, taking care of pretty much everything the Gulf War bombs missed. The inspectors wrecked all the equipment and destroyed every missile, bomb and laboratory they could find. They were tantalizingly close to declaring Iraq fully disarmed when the wheels came off UNSCOM in 1998. In the intervening years, no evidence has been put forth demonstrating Iraq's procurement of new weapons development equipment and material, items that are watched very closely. Our satellite technology can read a watch ticking on an arm in downtown Baghdad, and is more than capable of noting whether or not Hussein's soldiers and scientists have been busy in the deserts outside Basra. No such documentation has ever been presented.
Forget all that. Accept the flawed but widely accepted premise that Saddam has these weapons practically falling out of his ears. Let's take a walk down a path to the future.
Powell gives his spiel to the UN, which is so dazzling that a resolution for war is immediately granted. The tanks roll and the jets fly. The 'Shock and Awe' plan developed by the Pentagon and reported on last week by CBS is put into effect - 800 cruise missiles are fired into downtown Baghdad, a city of five million people. Those cruise missiles are followed by a fusillade of 'smart bombs' which will be proven to be 100% accurate because all of them will hit Iraq.
Saddam doesn't quit. His army and security services don't turn on him. The people of Iraq do not rise up either, as they will be busy dying, hiding and mourning. Because we have absolutely no intelligence on the day to day location of Hussein, our rain of weaponry does not kill him. He hangs on, waving his middle finger into the cameras of the Al Jazeera network, which will film this alongside the shattered bodies of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. The necessity of sending in ground troops to finish the job becomes manifest, at which point America will be forced to absorb casualty figures not seen since Vietnam. In the worst case scenario, those troops get bogged down in Baghdad, at which point the newly minted rules for the release of tactical nuclear weapons come vividly into play.
There are two diverging nightmares arising from this entirely possible scenario, both of which arrive at your doorstep. If the worst comes to pass, and our forces use a nuclear weapon to seal the deal and release our troops from the bloodbath of street-to-street combat, it is absolutely certain that Pakistan or Iran, or both, or someone else entirely, will deliver a nuclear weapon into the hands of al Qaeda. When the mushroom cloud goes up in Iraq, all bets are off.
Perhaps more disturbing is the scenario that comes if everything goes completely according to plan. Iraq is a nation that is 97% Muslim, and the civilian casualties that will come from a picture-perfect execution of the American war plan will motivate a shadow army of terrorists who would, under normal conditions, welcome the death of the secular heretic Saddam. This war has nothing to do with dealing with that threat, but it will unleash the fury of that army upon us immediately. They will see the corpses of innocent Muslims, and they will come for us. Here. The front lines of this war will move to your neighborhood and mine.
That is the best-case scenario, and that is the rub. Whether or not nuclear weapons come into play, our incredibly agile and effective terrorist foes will attack us on the home front, should we kill Iraqi civilians. The best laid plans involve this, whether we like it or not. Meanwhile, George W. Bush has done absolutely nothing to make sure we are safe here at home from the inevitable blowback.
The Homeland Security Department has been created, but is still tied in knots trying to streamline communication and interaction between dozens and dozens of intelligence agencies. The same CIA, FBI and NSA that allowed the September 11th attacks to bruise the skies above New York and Washington are still responsible for our safety, and there has been no interior reform whatsoever to solve the security holes that allowed the terrorists to attack us in the first place. The independent investigation meant to cure these ills has gone dark and silent. Our ports, borders and airports are still security sieves. Not one city or town is prepared to handle a biological or chemical attack. Hussein may not have those weapons, but it is entirely possible that al Qaeda does.
In essence, the King is calling for war while his own castle walls lay in ruin around him. The battlefield will not be in some faraway land, but right here, inside the moat.
This is not some mealy-mouthed appeaser argument. This is fundamental tactical analysis, and it says we are not ready for this war. During the entirety of the 20th century, we could feel relatively safe behind our oceans, because the wars always took place on someone else's ground. After September 11th, that changed, and we were not ready for it, and we are still not.
Bear this in mind when you realize that Saddam Hussein has been in office since 1979 and has never, not once, made an aggressive move against the United States. Bear this in mind when you understand that Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, two very viable foes who have actually attacked us, want nothing to do with Hussein because he is a secular dictator who has been crushing Islamic fundamentalism for thirty years. If we attack, those forces will move against us in the name of Iraq. They are, in fact, just waiting for us to move.
Bear this in mind when you consider the inspectors, whose work will eventually uncover any weapons while simultaneously protecting us against terrorist blowback from a war. That's right: The United nations, so denigrated by the Bush administration, is currently working overtime to save your life.
What is this war worth to you? Are you willing to have it come to your city, to your family? It will. Bank on it. The U.S. military may be all set to fight. We as a nation are not at all prepared to defend ourselves against it here at home. Bank on that, as well.
William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times bestselling author of two books - "War On Iraq" (with Scott Ritter) available now from Context Books, and "The Greatest Sedition is Silence," available in May 2003 from Pluto Press. He teaches high school in Boston, MA.
Scott Lowery contributed research to this report.
© : t r u t h o u t 2002
Reprinted from t r u t h o u t:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/020503A.htm
Platinum Member
02-06-2003, 07:53 AM
#226
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My answer
"For the sake of argument, let's say that Saddam Hussein does indeed have chemical and biological weapons somewhere in Iraq."
He does, it's a fact
Leave off the nukes, as the IEIA has bluntly stated that no such program or weapon exists in Iraq
maybe CNN told you that, but they haven't said "NO SUCH WEAPONS EXHIST IN IRAQ" How could they say that, how could they know that????? Iraq is a big place.
Tom did you even watch Mr. Powell's presentation? Even the liberals are backin down after hearing Mr. Powell. France is making a slow retreat as well.
Colin Powell reported that Saddam has (to our knowledge) two of the three elements needed to make a nuke and for all we know and in all likelyhood he has been working to obtain the nuclear fission material he needs. We intercepted crates of aluminum tubes from Africa that he purchased in order to centrifuge and or make the delivery devices.
given freely to him by the Reagan administration and a number of prominent American corporations
Reagan's Sec. of Defense was on last night in defense to this, during the Iran Iraq war, the Reagan administration according to him, "wished both countries could lose the war". The strategy was to make sure that there was a stalemate and that nobody conquered the other in that war, so yes we did provide some weaponry to Iraq. We helped the Soviet Union also in WW II but that does not mean we agreed with everything they did. It's a matter of lesser of two evils.
They were tantalizingly close to declaring Iraq fully disarmed when the wheels came off UNSCOM in 1998
and why did the wheels come off? Answer: because they were too close. Too close to what? Answer: too close to disarming Saddaam. So what did he do? He threw them out and bought himself 5 years to continue what they were too close to.
no evidence has been put forth demonstrating Iraq's procurement of new weapons
What, are you kidding me? NO EVIDENCE??????
is more than capable of noting whether or not Hussein's soldiers and scientists have been busy in the deserts outside Basra. No such documentation has ever been presented.
where did you get your information from? I'll ask you again did you not see the sanitized factories in the Satellite photos, and the diagrams of the mobile labs on truck and railcar beds as desribed by Iraqi defectors?? I suppose you believe the Iraqi representatives whos argument is, "dee Amedicans are lying, lies I tell you, dees are cartoons"
Powell gives his spiel to the UN, which is so dazzling that a resolution for war is immediately granted
It doesn't have to be granted, the President is authorized, and 17 useless UN resolutions have been blatently violated
The tanks roll and the jets fly. The 'Shock and Awe' plan developed by the Pentagon and reported on last week by CBS is put into effect - 800 cruise missiles are fired into downtown Baghdad, a city of five million people. Those cruise missiles are followed by a fusillade of 'smart bombs' which will be proven to be 100% accurate because all of them will hit Iraq.
are you privy to Gen. Frank's strategy??? Thanks for letting us know what is going to happen, I thought that was classified information
Saddam doesn't quit. His army and security services don't turn on him
but history says, they will
The people of Iraq do not rise up either, as they will be busy dying, hiding and mourning
but the death of Iraqi people didn't bother you when Saddam was exterminating them himself. Yes some innocent people will die a casualty that unfortunately might have to occur for the betterment of the world, and for the best interest of the United States, it is better them than us.
The necessity of sending in ground troops to finish the job becomes manifest, at which point America will be forced to absorb casualty figures not seen since Vietnam
and where are all those who suggested prior to going into Afganistan that it would be a bloodbath of our American soldiers? Where are they today?
Iraq is a nation that is 97% Muslim
secular heretic Saddam
97% where did you get that statistic? I don't know if I would call Saddam secular, he speaks of god pretty often.
and effective terrorist foes will attack us on the home front, should we kill Iraqi civilians
they don't have any intention of attacking us anyway? If we leave Saddam in place, there is a much higher likelyhood that an organized well funded mass casualty attack takes place in the near future
George W. Bush has done absolutely nothing to make sure we are safe here at home from the inevitable blowback.
NOTHING? NOT A THING? and you support that with what facts? What did Clinton do?
Not one city or town is prepared to handle a biological or chemical attack
that I agree with
Saddam Hussein has been in office since 1979 and has never, not once, made an aggressive move against the United States
he tried to assasinate George Bush 41
Bear this in mind when you understand that Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, two very viable foes who have actually attacked us, want nothing to do with Hussein because he is a secular dictator who has been crushing Islamic fundamentalism for thirty years
but they have a common hatred - USA
the UN is going to protect us? The UN is going to find the weapons? WHEN? When have they ever found anything significant? They gave N. Korea a clean bill of health didn't they? How can you expect them to find anything, that's a tall task when you're up against the resources of the wealthy nation of Iraq whose mission statement is DECEPTION?
The United nations, so denigrated by the Bush administration, is currently working overtime to save your life.
the UN is in danger of losing it's own life and becoming a null organization. You can only say "stop or else" so many times. 17 is too many. Saddam is saying "or else what"?
What is this war worth to you? Are you willing to have it come to your city, to your family?
absolutely not. But it came way too close for comfort in Sept. 2001. I wish people like Saddam Hussein didn't exhist on this planet
It will. Bank on it. The U.S. military may be all set to fight. We as a nation are not at all prepared to defend ourselves against it here at home. Bank on that, as well
Protecting this entire nation from terrorist attack is about as tall a task asking the UN to find all of Saddam's weapons in the great deserts of Iraq. There is no simple solution, and I don't hear any answers coming from the left. All they seem to do is refute the Bush administration. How about this, why don't democrats stop playing politics and crying because they are not in POWER for a little while and help to figure out what is best for our future before there is no USA for democrats to ever be in POWER of again. If you are so opposed to the plan, come up with an answer. The fact is, most of the liberals have nothing to say, and alot of them are coming to see the unfortunate conclusion when they look at the overwhealming facts, that this war is inevitable. If it weren't for the liberal opposition, Saddam may have been remove years ago. That couldn't happen pre Sept. 11, why couldn't it happen? Well look how hard it is to make the democrats understand the need to remove him today in the wake of Sept. 11.
Saddam and the terrorists that he is clearly in support of, are coming after us whether we go now or not. Like it or not, if we continue to allow Saddam to develop the weaponry that he needs to accomplish his goals, we may live in a country like Iraq one day.
He does, it's a fact
Leave off the nukes, as the IEIA has bluntly stated that no such program or weapon exists in Iraq
maybe CNN told you that, but they haven't said "NO SUCH WEAPONS EXHIST IN IRAQ" How could they say that, how could they know that????? Iraq is a big place.
Tom did you even watch Mr. Powell's presentation? Even the liberals are backin down after hearing Mr. Powell. France is making a slow retreat as well.
Colin Powell reported that Saddam has (to our knowledge) two of the three elements needed to make a nuke and for all we know and in all likelyhood he has been working to obtain the nuclear fission material he needs. We intercepted crates of aluminum tubes from Africa that he purchased in order to centrifuge and or make the delivery devices.
given freely to him by the Reagan administration and a number of prominent American corporations
Reagan's Sec. of Defense was on last night in defense to this, during the Iran Iraq war, the Reagan administration according to him, "wished both countries could lose the war". The strategy was to make sure that there was a stalemate and that nobody conquered the other in that war, so yes we did provide some weaponry to Iraq. We helped the Soviet Union also in WW II but that does not mean we agreed with everything they did. It's a matter of lesser of two evils.
They were tantalizingly close to declaring Iraq fully disarmed when the wheels came off UNSCOM in 1998
and why did the wheels come off? Answer: because they were too close. Too close to what? Answer: too close to disarming Saddaam. So what did he do? He threw them out and bought himself 5 years to continue what they were too close to.
no evidence has been put forth demonstrating Iraq's procurement of new weapons
What, are you kidding me? NO EVIDENCE??????
is more than capable of noting whether or not Hussein's soldiers and scientists have been busy in the deserts outside Basra. No such documentation has ever been presented.
where did you get your information from? I'll ask you again did you not see the sanitized factories in the Satellite photos, and the diagrams of the mobile labs on truck and railcar beds as desribed by Iraqi defectors?? I suppose you believe the Iraqi representatives whos argument is, "dee Amedicans are lying, lies I tell you, dees are cartoons"
Powell gives his spiel to the UN, which is so dazzling that a resolution for war is immediately granted
It doesn't have to be granted, the President is authorized, and 17 useless UN resolutions have been blatently violated
The tanks roll and the jets fly. The 'Shock and Awe' plan developed by the Pentagon and reported on last week by CBS is put into effect - 800 cruise missiles are fired into downtown Baghdad, a city of five million people. Those cruise missiles are followed by a fusillade of 'smart bombs' which will be proven to be 100% accurate because all of them will hit Iraq.
are you privy to Gen. Frank's strategy??? Thanks for letting us know what is going to happen, I thought that was classified information
Saddam doesn't quit. His army and security services don't turn on him
but history says, they will
The people of Iraq do not rise up either, as they will be busy dying, hiding and mourning
but the death of Iraqi people didn't bother you when Saddam was exterminating them himself. Yes some innocent people will die a casualty that unfortunately might have to occur for the betterment of the world, and for the best interest of the United States, it is better them than us.
The necessity of sending in ground troops to finish the job becomes manifest, at which point America will be forced to absorb casualty figures not seen since Vietnam
and where are all those who suggested prior to going into Afganistan that it would be a bloodbath of our American soldiers? Where are they today?
Iraq is a nation that is 97% Muslim
secular heretic Saddam
97% where did you get that statistic? I don't know if I would call Saddam secular, he speaks of god pretty often.
and effective terrorist foes will attack us on the home front, should we kill Iraqi civilians
they don't have any intention of attacking us anyway? If we leave Saddam in place, there is a much higher likelyhood that an organized well funded mass casualty attack takes place in the near future
George W. Bush has done absolutely nothing to make sure we are safe here at home from the inevitable blowback.
NOTHING? NOT A THING? and you support that with what facts? What did Clinton do?
Not one city or town is prepared to handle a biological or chemical attack
that I agree with
Saddam Hussein has been in office since 1979 and has never, not once, made an aggressive move against the United States
he tried to assasinate George Bush 41
Bear this in mind when you understand that Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, two very viable foes who have actually attacked us, want nothing to do with Hussein because he is a secular dictator who has been crushing Islamic fundamentalism for thirty years
but they have a common hatred - USA
the UN is going to protect us? The UN is going to find the weapons? WHEN? When have they ever found anything significant? They gave N. Korea a clean bill of health didn't they? How can you expect them to find anything, that's a tall task when you're up against the resources of the wealthy nation of Iraq whose mission statement is DECEPTION?
The United nations, so denigrated by the Bush administration, is currently working overtime to save your life.
the UN is in danger of losing it's own life and becoming a null organization. You can only say "stop or else" so many times. 17 is too many. Saddam is saying "or else what"?
What is this war worth to you? Are you willing to have it come to your city, to your family?
absolutely not. But it came way too close for comfort in Sept. 2001. I wish people like Saddam Hussein didn't exhist on this planet
It will. Bank on it. The U.S. military may be all set to fight. We as a nation are not at all prepared to defend ourselves against it here at home. Bank on that, as well
Protecting this entire nation from terrorist attack is about as tall a task asking the UN to find all of Saddam's weapons in the great deserts of Iraq. There is no simple solution, and I don't hear any answers coming from the left. All they seem to do is refute the Bush administration. How about this, why don't democrats stop playing politics and crying because they are not in POWER for a little while and help to figure out what is best for our future before there is no USA for democrats to ever be in POWER of again. If you are so opposed to the plan, come up with an answer. The fact is, most of the liberals have nothing to say, and alot of them are coming to see the unfortunate conclusion when they look at the overwhealming facts, that this war is inevitable. If it weren't for the liberal opposition, Saddam may have been remove years ago. That couldn't happen pre Sept. 11, why couldn't it happen? Well look how hard it is to make the democrats understand the need to remove him today in the wake of Sept. 11.
Saddam and the terrorists that he is clearly in support of, are coming after us whether we go now or not. Like it or not, if we continue to allow Saddam to develop the weaponry that he needs to accomplish his goals, we may live in a country like Iraq one day.
Last edited by at100plus; 02-06-2003 at 08:11 AM.
02-06-2003, 10:34 AM
#227
Registered
For what it's worth, Catman......I am very impressed !
I know how hard it is for you to say that !! To bad more Americans
don't understand there comes a time to present a United front
to the world.
I can't help but think that if the rest of the world saw us as a
United front behind our Pres. They would not play these games
with us........
I know how hard it is for you to say that !! To bad more Americans
don't understand there comes a time to present a United front
to the world.
I can't help but think that if the rest of the world saw us as a
United front behind our Pres. They would not play these games
with us........
02-06-2003, 01:25 PM
#228
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: My answer
Originally posted by at100plus
That was a great reply. I thought this thread was dead, but I guess until Saddam is the thread will go on.
As much as I wanted Powell's speach to work, it looks like it did not. My biggest fear in it all is that if we take this without the rest of the world on our side we will have a huge terrorist problem. For me it is not liberal vs conservative as regards terrorism, it is are we prepared at home and is containment going to be the better way for us to have time to prepare for what is coming. The Trade Center disaster might end up being only a small thing if we are not careful. I am far from an expert or even enough knowledgable to be dangerous about all this, but it seems we are preparing for the wrong war. Missile defense, etc. is not preparing for the war that is coming. They already used our own planes against us, what is next? I doubt it that it is going to be in the form of conventional warfare or missiles from over there.
The question I reallly want the answer to is:
Who would Jesus bomb?
