Printable View
No war by Bush.
Where do you think we would be today?
Would regime change still be the final common pathway to giving Iraq a new beginning or do you think SAddam and his sons would have been allowed to lead Iraq into the future unchecked, and everyone is cool with that.
Feel free to offer any scenario YOU see as most likely. I was just setting the ball in motion.
To me I guess it comes down to how much energy should the world waste on this one small country and this one leader.
Continue to moniter him until he and his sons are dead.
Tell him his penalty is over and he is free to pursue the future in his sovereign nation as he sees fit.
As Boab pointed out with Iran, why should he not be allowed to build nukes for himself. Who has the right to block him from importing and building what he desires.
We already know what he DID before, and my country, for certain, is on his shit list.
As I have said before, I doubt Iraq would ever shoot a nuke at the US, but he might give one to someone who might.
Short-term likelihood would be that things would have continued at par...Oil-for-Food was lining Saddam's pockets, so the U.N. wasn't a concern; Russia, France, China, Germany, et.al., were satiated.
Had Saddam died naturally, his sons surely would have assumed control, and the situation vis a vis the Iraqi citizenry likely would have worsened, which wouldn't have bothered anyone but ex-pat Iraqis greatly; it is largely true that, apart from Israel, there is no overweening concern for any of the mid-eastern countries by outside entities, apart from the latent concern for their oil, and that has been the raw stabilizing influence over the entire region for the past what, 75 years or so?
Apart from the Israeli/Palestinian situation, which is somewhat static, things could have gone on as they were for another 40-50 years, while the region's various constituents honed their own brand of nuclear detente.
Terrorism would be the wild-card, and the only ingredient likely to have caused outside powers to weigh in, which is, of course, what happened, except sooner, rather than later.
How's that?
Why no war? What difference would it make that there were no WMDs?Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes
Bush has stated quite clearly that had he known then what he knows now he would have done the same thing, so WMDs wouldn't have come into it. He would have declared that he was going to rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein, free the people, and bring about democracy.
So with or without WMDs Iraq would be in the same mess it's in today.
Two facets. The world is told Saddam is clean AND no war. What was unclear about that? Let's not repeat this answer the question fiasco from the other thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
Please use you brain to give us something to think about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UKResident
Stop contradicting yourself and while you're at it, stop watching FOX. Listen to hobbes and don't give a reply next time. Iraq is worst off now then it was in Saddam's hands, atleast people didn't live in the conditions they are now, always afraid of terrorist activity, no food, water, hell even electricity. Democracy is a great thing yes, but there's a limit to everything, in this case bringing about democracy only to be faced with such a huge opposition ("Insurgents" which I like to call freedom fighters, mind you not the ones that kidnap ppl and behead them no, I refer to the people that actually pick up a gun and fight the occupation.). God knows what's in store for Iraq in the next 10 years, but one thing's for sure. It's not going to be a good thing.
Edit: oh ya and supposedly lying to the world about the war in the first place then commiting horrible atrocities is okay as long as "plan" b works out (get rid of saddam and democracy).
I would like honest, thoughtful replies. This is a subject which I am not really qualified to give any definitive answers, just my impressions as I have witnessed events unfold.
Anymore flaming or disrupting the thread I will ask it to be closed :)
Thank you Hobbes, but l don't need lessons from you, l started my reply with the words "Why no war?" This was in answer to your unstated assumption that no WMDs means no war when your president has stated that it would have made no difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes
You started this thread as a troll, that is quite plain, l hope in future you will be as stringent with your own off topic spam in other's threads as you are with your insistance on keeping to topic in yours
As for you, l suggest you look up a definition of irony before you spout off and make yourself look stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by cpt_azad
Mods, please close. As if this forum has mods on.
UK Resident is a troll and is dead to me. I encourage everyone to understand his game and just ignore anything he posts. He posts for reaction, and for no other reason. I gave him way too much slack, yet he still hung himself.
Wanker, please read above. Am I a genius? Do I have the knack of premonition? Am I before my time?Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes
I told you so.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...sident/cry.gif http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...sident/cry.gif http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...sident/cry.gif
They should call this "The Kindergarten", l've never seen such a bunch of cry-babies. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...sident/cry.gif
Hobbes and Busyman know how to dish it out, then spit their dummies when they don't get their own way. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...sident/cry.gif
In over two years of coming to this board l've never seen a tantrum thrown like this one from Hobbes, he even sent me a PM titled "You are dead". Come on now, what a baby you are Hobbes, diddums get upset? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...sident/cry.gif
You come to expect this sort of thing from Busyman, he's been the same ever since he got here, big-noting himself, insulting people and resorting to childish threats when that hasn't worked, but you Hobbes, l used to have a lot of respect for you, but you've shot your bolt now. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...sident/cry.gif
If there had been no war in Iraq would Bush have won re-election? Would it have made any difference at all to the US election?
Off-topic: There is an 'ignore' option on this forum if you find someone's post obnoxious/boring/Yogi I suggest people try using that rather than having threads closed. It's defiently six of one and half a dozen of another at the moment and quite tedious.
If you stop feeding the trolls they soon get bored. And, in fact, end up looking stupid by the fact that no-one is reacting to them.
The UN for one. :unsure: Because of Saddams continued refusal to comply with international law regarding the inspection precesses, etc. concerning nukes, Iraq was not allowed to seek or build them.Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes
@Withcheese - I wish I could block the Drawing Room all together. :frusty:
There is no international law regarding inspections, if there was Israel would be in much more trouble than Iraq, as they actually have them, and have always refused to allow inpections. The "law" you talk of is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, this treaty is voluntary and even after signing it a country can pull out. Israel, North Korea, India, Pakistan and Cuba are all non-signatories.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skizo
There is no World Police Force, not the UN or anyone else, no country has the right to tell another country that they can or cannot have nuclear weapons.
Yes, withcheese, I can block him. But it still doesn't prevent him from derailing the thread, does it?
I just wanted to start fresh. Of course, the mods have yet to close this.
I sent a PM to the only Mod/admin on to close it. I told him it was in World News.
Guess what he told me? Give me a link? Now that made me laugh. Yeah it is the one at the top of the page with my name as author that requests it to be closed.
And actually, I have NOT feed this troll. I have been polite to him up until he came onto my thread and pulled his same antics. Then I told him to take his crap elsewhere.
And look where the thread is, only 1 on topic reply.
True hobbes this thread sucks ball hairs. :1eye:Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes
I didn't know about the ignore option. I may use it but I'm eeexxxtremely good at ignoring folk on my own. ;)
The worrying thing is that you two seem to actually believe the nonsense you spout.
I think I'll take my own advice.
Huh? :unsure: :( :huh: :blink: :ohmy: :no: :frusty: :crying:Quote:
Originally Posted by Withcheese
Is this for me :unsure:Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
If so; no, no, no, yes you did and I reluctantly agreed.
Stop calling me wanker, lest I shall start a rumour about you being Billy Dean :1eye:
If it wasn't for me then :blink: :blushing:
Shut it, BD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
My bad, I forgot it's lowercase, wanker. (related to the PM btw)Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Withcheese
This post confuses me and I can't seem to get a clarification. Any help?