Starting to feel a little bit foolish?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MasterBlaster
It wasn't Saddam's fault?:confused:

Remind me again please why there was a Gulf war and sanctions in the first place?

---

Don't get me wrong, it was Saddam's fault, but we also have to take responsibility for our actions.

It's a lot like saying to a murderer, surrender, or I'll shoot one of your kids every year? Technically, you could argue that it's their fault for not surrendering, but you still have to assume some responsibility for the childrens deaths.....

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Futt Bucker
Don't get me wrong, it was Saddam's fault, but we also have to take responsibility for our actions.

It's a lot like saying to a murderer, surrender, or I'll shoot one of your kids every year? Technically, you could argue that it's their fault for not surrendering, but you still have to assume some responsibility for the childrens deaths.....

---

Why should we accept responsibility for anothers fookup. Provisions were written into the sanctions that permitted Iraq to export as much oil as they want as long as they were paid in food and medical supplies. Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the planet. Your telling me that they didn't have the ability to feed or nurse their people? Sheit, If saddam was smart he would have fed his people, or even over fed them. Then you have an entire population of people willing to kill/die for their dictator(meal ticket). Taking care of his people would have made him much more powerfull in the world stage let alone the region. Hell they'd prolly give him the nobel peace prize and a boat load of shiny new nukes with pretty pink bows on them as a birthday present. Saddam fooked up. Not The coallition. (Which is now at 40 countries) BTW

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaffer
The is probably not the best time for jokes.

I don't think anything about time taken, I listen to people who know about such things, such as Mr Blix and the UN council. I'd rather be optimistic about the chances of saving thousands on innocent peoples lives than a pessimist when it comes to warfare. Pre-emptive strikes should not become the new world order; it has been tested on a smaller scale with internment in Northern Ireland in the 70s, and that was an unmitigated failure.

---

What people don't realize is you cannot save them either way. If you go with just containment then you are going to kill around 6,000 a month and most of them will be kids.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Futt Bucker
Thank you for two excellent links, they are most informative and un-biased. I ignored the other links (after I had read them) as they were either extremely biased or I couldn't open them (the UN one).

However, whilst the two links show what we all know (Saddam is a bad man), they do not support the figures you quote. The 10's of thousands of deaths are a direct result of sanctions, not of any action or inaction of Saddam. As the WHO has repeatedly stated, the country is devastated, with poor water supplies and distribution. Before the Gulf war it was very progressive with public health etc. Don't worry, I'm not trying to suggest that Saddam is a benign dictator, but it is back to responsibility for our actions. It is the repercussions of the Gulf War and the sanctions which are causing huge casualties.

---

Allright fine don't believe it, pretend he treats his people well.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Maven
Allright fine don't believe it, pretend he treats his people well.

---

Christ! Would you guys stop putting words in peoples mouths. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Maven
Allright fine don't believe it, pretend he treats his people well.

---

Oh sorry, I've just realised that maybe you don't know what benign means (see my post that you quoted).

here, this will clarify it

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=benign

Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Futt Bucker
Christ! Would you guys stop putting words in peoples mouths. :rolleyes:

---

I'm not... Your saying those deaths came from containment. they didnt, thier independent of that. Deaths from containment is around 60,000 per year.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GingerNut
Alright then. Here's one for you. How is America any diferent from all the other "Bad" countries who have killed civilians?

---

How about the fact that the USA does not target civilians? BUT, civilians will be killed because if you drop 2000 pounds of boom boom, whether or not you can guide it in to within 2 feet of what you want to hit, the explosion will kill some. More will die because saddam uses civilians as cannon fodder and he hides his military amongst them.

Yea he puts his military posts near hospitals and schools and ****.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Maven
Yea he puts his military posts near hospitals and schools and ****.

---

Yeah, thats right, the country that fires the missile is completely without blame for the resulting deaths :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Futt Bucker
Yeah, thats right, the country that fires the missile is completely without blame for the resulting deaths :rolleyes:

---

In this case, yah pretty much.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arc
In this case, yah pretty much.

---

:p Oh look, Arc stuns us once again with his knowledge! :p

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaffer
Maven:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...ets/index.html

"U.S. and Kuwaiti sources initially reported all the missiles as Scuds, but the Pentagon later said it believes they were al Samouds or some other type of missile. "

Perhaps you should think of Marion Allbright's face before you shoot your load....

---

Pratice what you preach:

Quote:

---

Kuwaiti officials said earlier that Iraq fired at least two Scud missiles at the Gulf state but they were intercepted, though Iraq denied having Scuds and any involvement in a strike.


The officials also said Iraq fired two other missiles -- smaller, Chinese-made ones -- into Kuwait's northern desert.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Maven
Pratice what you preach:

---

But I think your right, need to wait till more information comes in.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Futt Bucker
[B]Oh Christ do I really have to repeat myself again!

Okay, for the umpteenth time. Nobody thinks Saddam is not a bad man.

---

no worries, this will be your last time. Count me out. Finding the bad guy is part of the mechanical process of natural selection.

74 replies, ~ 400 views (this thread only), hundreds more replies and views across all the war threads, in this forum only...

What do we have?

Saddam Hussein is Evil
Saddam Hussein is a Liar
Saddam Hussein is a Bad Man
Saddam Hussein has not told the truth
Saddam Hussein is a Villain
Saddam Hussein hides the truth
Saddam Hussein is Disgusting
Saddam Hussein speaks in haf-truths
....
I mean, ***? He is bad, he is evil, he has lied, he is lying. So f***ing what? Why murders hundreds of others and totally demolish and eradicate, cities and towns? Can the CIA still not invent an explosible cigar?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kleinma
Dennis Leary
None of it is gonna make a lick of difference, casue we got the bombs, OK?

---

Is that not the same number which goes?

Quote:

---

I am an ***HOLE

---

Also is that not the same number which says?

Quote:

---

I've got to have fun at someone else's expense

---

At least I know its the same fella.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

posted bi Ianpbaker:

Quote:

---

not at all, I'm just going on the fact that they are being bombed because he has weapons of mass destruction by countries that have weapons of mass destruction. the entire concept of this war is ironic.

---

I think that is the point:

I don't like WMDs in hands of a proved assasain like Saddam, but I don't like them in the hands of a cow-boy like Bush.

I don't think that evilness can be fighted with evilness, because anyway wil win the evilness.

I can't approve a war unilaterally adopted, against the UN and against almost the entire world. I think that the affair could be managed in a pacific way.

I wouldn't even call this a war, this is an invasion.

Why the US are not a little sincere and admit that they are after the oil?

Quote:

---

I can't approve a war unilaterally adopted, against the UN and against almost the entire world. I think that the affair could be managed in a pacific way.

---

Unilaterally? How is 40 countries supporting this effort in a variety of ways considered unilaterally?

Or do you mean that just because France, Russia and China (who by the way have sold weapons equipment to iraq in clear violation of the sanctions.) aren't behind this then the whole would obviously isn't?

Don't get you facts confused by thinking this is unilateral...it isn't...the whole world may not be behind this, but the largest and most powerful countries are, in one way or another.

Quote:

---

Iraq has been firing Scud Missles at USA troops all morning. These missiles are banned and surprise, surprise ... the Inspectors found no evidence of them on the ground (They found no evidence of their destruction either, but that didn't seem to matter to the French or half the anti-war people on this board) Not to mention that a crop duster like plane fell to the ground that Iraq didn't have too, right in front of our military camp.

---

Just to back up the original post....

"Troops have secured "Huge" chemical weapons facility" Is what Fox News is saying right now. They say they have many sources confirming the news. Hmmm... I thought they said they didn't have any?..:)

Added:
They are saying it is 100 acres in size....That is huge, how could the UN miss that? I guess if we would have let them go another 4 months, they might have tripped over it at some point.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hellswraith
Added:
They are saying it is 100 acres in size....That is huge, how could the UN miss that? I guess if we would have let them go another 4 months, they might have tripped over it at some point.

---

they said it was in a regular town and it was hidden.. it had cover on the top so it could not be seen from satellite or spy planes... and it was never identified to the UN

Exactly why the U.N. inspectors were worthless. If you can't find a 100 acre plant how could you ever find a Mobile plant on a flat bed truck?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hellswraith
They are saying it is 100 acres in size....That is huge, how could the UN miss that? I guess if we would have let them go another 4 months, they might have tripped over it at some point.

---

So how did US satellite miss it then? Satellite evidence was used by Colin Powell in conjunction with UN findings befiore the start of the war.

And don't start sucking each other off yet:

Major Chris Hughes, a US forces spokesman in Kuwait, would not confirm the reports. He said there were "sites of interest" that the military was eager to examine but declined to comment on whether anything suspicious had been found: "A conclusion as far as chemical weapons are concerned is premature."


Did no-one teach you about looking before you leap? Arc, you more than anyone should know about shouting your mouth off before the final facts are published...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaffer
So how did US satellite miss it then? Satellite evidence was used by Colin Powell in conjunction with UN findings befiore the start of the war.

And don't start sucking each other off yet:

Major Chris Hughes, a US forces spokesman in Kuwait, would not confirm the reports. He said there were "sites of interest" that the military was eager to examine but declined to comment on whether anything suspicious had been found: "A conclusion as far as chemical weapons are concerned is premature."


Did no-one teach you about looking before you leap? Arc, you more than anyone should know about shouting your mouth off before the final facts are published...

---

Gaffer you are so anti American that even when something comes along like a chemical weapons plant YOU are so fast to dismiss it as nothing..

if you had read my post under arcs you would have seen that it was camouflaged on the top to blend into the desert.. so aerial photos would not show anything.. it was in a town that was otherwise vacant of military presence, surrounded by an electric fence and run by a high ranking Iraqi general...

but i am sure you are right.. i am sure it is nothing :rolleyes:

Even if they do find a plant with traces of chemical weapons, so what ?
Doesn't mean that Saddam actually has any stocks of the stuff.

Not that I would care either way though.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Maven
Lets not forget that Japan and Germany tried to take over the entire world too. I'm willing to bet that your countrymen thought it was a good idea to drop any bomb on them at the time.

---

As for Iraq, except the war against Iran for 8 years, in which Iraq could not take over Iran, there's only the invasion of Kuwait. Kuwait could hardly qualify as the entire world, don't you think?

On the other hand, the US attacked Germany, it nuked Japan, it napalmed Vietnam, it destroyed Afghanistan and it's bombarding Iraq now. Seems like it's invading more countries than Iraq ever did. More close to the idea of the entire world :rolleyes:

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kleinma
Gaffer you are so anti American that even when something comes along like a chemical weapons plant YOU are so fast to dismiss it as nothing..

if you had read my post under arcs you would have seen that it was camouflaged on the top to blend into the desert.. so aerial photos would not show anything.. it was in a town that was otherwise vacant of military presence, surrounded by an electric fence and run by a high ranking Iraqi general...

but i am sure you are right.. i am sure it is nothing :rolleyes:

---

Gethe****outtahere! Anti_American? I've spent half my time on this forum explaining to you that I'm not anti-American you loser.
I work for an American project, with American bosses and american DBAs. I have had many drinks with these people, and we've talked about war, and whilst they are certainly in favour of the war, they are aware that my anti-war sentiments do not necessarily mean I am against their country.

So don't give me your easy getout ignorant anti-american bull**** - change the record :rolleyes:

As for the existance of camoflage, where did you read it was hidden? I'm no military expert, but 100 acre is a big frigging area to camoflage. I'm not disputing you, but I can't find any stories from my usual sources aying that they camoflaged it....

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kleinma
Gaffer you are so anti American that even when something comes along like a chemical weapons plant YOU are so fast to dismiss it as nothing..

if you had read my post under arcs you would have seen that it was camouflaged on the top to blend into the desert.. so aerial photos would not show anything.. it was in a town that was otherwise vacant of military presence, surrounded by an electric fence and run by a high ranking Iraqi general...

but i am sure you are right.. i am sure it is nothing :rolleyes:

---

So, if you wait for confirmation or a little more information before making a comment, you are an Anti-American? If that's so, I dearly wish there are more anti-Americans in the world :rolleyes:

And by that same stupid logic of yours, you should also brand Major Chris Hughes, a US forces spokesman in Kuwait as an Anti-American because he too has not confirmed the site of interest in question is a chemical weapons manufacturing plant.

.

Did you guys notice that the rebel forces had gas masks? =(

That certainly wouldn't go unreported, don't you think? :rolleyes:

That must be another fictitious thing from your country, unless you are able to back it up with some good dependable resources...

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
That certainly wouldn't go unreported, don't you think? :rolleyes:

That must be another fictitious thing from your country, unless you are able to back it up with some good dependable resources...

.

---

Its been on CNN off and on all day today.... Making some worry that when we get so close to bagdad, their going to send chemcial weapons in our direction =(

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Maven
Its been on CNN off and on all day today.... Making some worry that when we get so close to bagdad, their going to send chemcial weapons in our direction =(

---

Can't find anything on BBC or CNN website. Any links?

Searching for "chemical plant" yielded nothing related to Iraq on both www.bbc.co.uk and www.cnn.com, results were sorted by date, with the latest reports being first.

.

Well get a TV with cable or satelite. It's no wonder you people act so ignorant, you can't even watch the news!

To whom, pray tell, are you referring ?

Quote:

---

U.N. weapons inspectors are not aware of any large-scale chemical sites which could be used to make chemical weapons in Najaf, said Ewen Buchanan, spokesman for the inspectors.

However, there are many such dual-use sites in other parts of the country because of Iraq’s petrochemical industry.
U.N. inspectors visited a cement plant in Najaf earlier this year but did not report finding anything.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arc
Well get a TV with cable or satelite. It's no wonder you people act so ignorant, you can't even watch the news!

---

That's alright. Your media persons are so irresponsible, they avoid putting things in black and white on the websites, because they can get away with any crap in front of the camera, just like your politicians. Not a shred of proof, but loads and loads of dramatics in front of the camera. :rolleyes:

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arc
Well get a TV with cable or satelite. It's no wonder you people act so ignorant, you can't even watch the news!

---

And for an ignorant little **** like you, the mention was there a day or two back, where the US forces claimed to have found "sites of interst" including a chemical plant of about 100 acres size. That's how the news spread about the chemical plant in the first place. If even that article cannot show up in the search, you guys should be fixing your sites. And the other possibility is the article was either removed or edited so the Chemical Plant mention has vanished from there.....

.