Bush's Speech..

[ketoprak]

Originally posted by kAb@18 March 2003 - 04:08
i've been convinced for a long time. his speech was good (i think it would've been better if he had been sitting) and saddam needs to leave.

What the fuck is the difference with Bush sitting or standing?

Would it change anything on the war? Make it milder, smoother, lighter or whatsoever ?

This is not COMMUNICATION, this is WAR. And WAR needs REASONS.

And I didn't see any valuable reason in this speech. I only saw what the world allready knew before suddenly becoming real. And standing or sitting, it's the same absolute lack of logic. Even a 3 years child would have a better reasoning.

I think it's time for the people of the United States to revolt. Their president, not even democratically elected, is under the influence and will soon become a criminal.

[summerlinda]

Originally posted by dwightfry@18 March 2003 - 14:30
If you are going to hate america, hate the government, not the people. Like all countries that have governments that are for the war, a majority of the civilians don't.

Is that so? Who elected those governments?

Btw, i'm against the war, dont need to tell you why, its been told over and over and over again........

PS: I don't hate 'America', i only believe 'America' is wrong on this one.

[puremindmatters]

Originally posted by ketoprak@18 March 2003 - 17:02
I think it's time for the people of the United States to revolt. Their president, not even democratically elected, is under the influence and will soon become a criminal.

Perhaps he should have 48 hours to leave the country first.

[slick nick]

Can we put this bullshit about him gassing his own people to rest please? The Kurds live in the country but aren't his or Iraqi people. As far as people electing these governments some people voting for him and others didn't and believe he stole the election with all the irregularities and voting roles having people taken off so he could win. And as for what the U.S. and Britian have to gain I've heard it's basically a compromise for Isreal's sake. The Palestinians get their state and an enemy of Isreal that threatens them is taken care of.

[slick nick]

Originally posted by ShareDaddy@18 March 2003 - 15:30
This war is not ABOUT oil, however as oil is the largest export of IRAQ I would see where you guys and gals might get the idea. However it is not about oil, it is about a dictator who has killed his own citizens and sponsored terrorism that has killed other nations citizens.

If it were about oil then you would see a US flag flying after the war and it would become another US held piece of land. This is not going to happen, it sickens me to think that you people continue taking the easy look at things and spouting the "OIL" reason. Removing Saddam will not increase the US oil depository, not one single barrel.

Kuwait is the single largest importer of IRAQI oil and they will continue to import the oil no matter who may be in power. Simply stating this conflict is about oil because it makes you feel better is not the right thing to do; this conflict is about right and wrong.

I know there probably is not a single person on this forum that was around during WWII, however there are a lot of people (of Jewish faith especially) that wish the US and its allies had taken out Hitler before he murdered millions. However that did not happen and the world watched or more true to real life closed their eyes in horror as Hitler slaughtered millions.

As we cannot go back in time and change what has transpired we can only try and do what is right now, and as Saddam has failed to meet the UN's resolutions regarding weapons of mass destruction, then I feel it is time to put an end to it. As is the case with all conflicts, there will be casualties, however it could be much worse to let the man stay in power and possibly kill many more people than this conflict may.

That is it for me at this time, I may have more of a rebuttal shortly, need to take a break.

Sponsored terrorism? Intelligence experts contradicted Bush on this. There's no evidence attesting to this and if you know of ome that's credible please post a link. That and you're point about him killing his own are two bullshit points people use to justify what's about to happen. According to this "Despite its violent tactics, MEK's strong stand against Iran-part of Bush's axis of evil-and pro democratic image have won it support of U.S. and European lawmakers." Lawmakers would be politicans right i.e. government people? The U.S. too supports terrorism then.

Just like in Afganistan there doesn't need to be a flag waving there. Someone we like will govern them and have policies friendly to our interest. that guy Karzi that's the president was a member of the same oil group as Cheney. People tried to deny an oil link their but there'll soon be an oil pipeline through there headed for east Asia isn't it isn't being constructed as we speak(I'm a bit behind on current events. I don't watch the news or read papers much).

Your WWII analogy is way off because after the gulf war when people were revolting that was the U.S.s chance to get him out then. What did we do? I forget exactly but we made sure he said in power. he has nothing that can reach the U.S. and if he didn'te it 12 years ago because he was told they'd be nuked he's not going to give it away knowing he'll be nuked once it's found to have come from him. Either way the inspections should go on and they be disarmed that way. This move is just because no one was buying the U.S. Britian bullshit about Iraq so Bush said fuck em all we gon hogtie Saddam and get him out our way. But hey he didn't have a mandate to be President so why would he wait for one through the U.N.

[merlin-1]

it is the order he mentioned them... btw you raeally believe that the oil is for the Iraqi people?



We might buy oil from them in the future but once a new goverment is in place the Iraqi people will benifit from their oil.What you don't seem to understand is we don't rely on the middle east for all our oil needs it does'nt even add up to 50%.I have several clients that are Iraqi and they support the US in it's efforts to remove sadam which IMO is nothing more than a two bit dictator and a hitler want to be who could care less about his people.Even his own son is a freak who tortures,rapes and kills his own people with his fathers approval.

[ketoprak]

That and you're point about him killing his own are two bullshit points people use to justify what's about to happen.

What follows may be in contradiction to what I wrote earlier. But it's not. What I read above make me feel important to add some usefull precisions.

I'm opposed to this war, but I believe that Saddam has killed his own people : kurds, chiits, and any opposant to the regime, just as Staline did in the past in USSR. Can you please post a few links with arguments against that idea?

I think Saddam is a real threat to its own people and that most of them are happy to be 'liberated' from him, be it by the USA alone. But I'm opposed to this war because, if it may be good for Iraq, it's very dangerous for 1. credibility of the UN and international multilateral regulation, 2. regional security, 3. world security.

If Bush had been a better diplomat he could have got rid of Saddam without endangering our future.

[jetje]

Originally posted by ShareDaddy@18 March 2003 - 16:30
This war is not ABOUT oil,

That's were i even more afraid of,

Read some articles about Bush, his daddy, chainey and some others have made a plan for total world domination. (They're building an empire....) These are just predicted 1st steps. Will look that up on the internet... where was it....

...yes i believe in conspiracy theories....

[dwightfry]

Read some articles about Bush, his daddy, chainey and some others have made a plan for total world domination.

I wouldn't go that far. LOL.

Besides, there is no way that bush is going to be re-elected. That would give him 2 years to complete his plan.

[slick nick]

Just put "the new american century" in a search engine and you can find out what bush(or should I say those with their hand up his ass) have planned. That documents there plans on putting in place governments friendly to their agenda.

Fot the person asking for links showing he didn't kill his own I'll look to see. I don't dispute the fact he's killed Kurds who are who we're(the U.S) say he did when we talk about what he's done but they aren't his people. That propaganda is always thrown out there as the first argument and it's a bullshit one in my opinion. It being the base argument and being a hollow one makes what comes after it weak also. And a Presidents son who rapes his people? I bet that's more propaganda but I'll look.