I believe this website is connected to the Matt Maupin MIA situation. Though not directly related.
His Mom & Dad live in Clermont County, Ohio about 2 counties east of me…the other side of Cincinnati, Ohio.
No time now will check it out later.
We should not attack Iraq
-
My civil rights have been violated by the Patriot act.
I no longer have the right to a trial by jury if President Bush doesn’t want me to. I get a military tribunal.
A search warent is no longer required to inspect my house. Now Bush has 1 million people doing it for him.
This president has violated the Seperation of Church and State more often than JFK cheated on his wife.
Who says Iraq can’t have Nuclear Weapons? 20 years from now half the world will have or be building nuclear weapons. Iraq is not that irresponsible. Saddam is not crazy, and he is very smart.
He invaded Kuwait, not betting that we would retailiate. We did, his military was destroyed, but he still stayed in power didn’t he? Same with gasing the Kurds. He’s still there, he played his cards right.
-
20 years from now half the world will have or be building nuclear weapons.
Whoa. Where are you getting these stats from? I’m not sure there wouldn’t be enriched Uranium (under the current embargo) or money to field a nuclear weapons program for this to happen.
Iraq is not that irresponsible. Saddam is not crazy, and he is very smart.
If I was smart enough to be Saddam, I would use those nuclear weapons as incredible leverage to get things my way. Suddenly the whole world would have to bow down to me and let me do as I please.
-
Nuclear weapons used as deterrent is a great way to gain concessions.
-
A lot of people have been saying that no nation is asking us to come in and save them from Sadam, like they were back at the Gulf War. That is not true. The 4th world nation of the Kurds is pleading for us to save them from Sadam.
But they aren’t anti-Israeli so the liberals don’t like them.
Hi Disclaimer!
-
But they aren’t anti-Israeli so the liberals don’t like them.
The support in the US for the Israeli is very high
-
It would not seem that way from the media or around here.
-
A lot of people have been saying that no nation is asking us to come in and save them from Sadam, like they were back at the Gulf War. That is not true. The 4th world nation of the Kurds is pleading for us to save them from Sadam.
But they aren’t anti-Israeli so the liberals don’t like them.
Hi Disclaimer!
Also back in 1990 Iraqi forces were bordering and poised to enter Saudi Arabia. This, i suspect, is the other “real reason” the US went into the Gulf - to support/build support by it’s “allies” in Saudi Arabia. This is the reason why the Saudi’s allowed the US to launch it’s attacks from there - it was for their own protection. Afterall, a good defense is a strong offense.
-
What do you think would happen if Saddam fired off his Nuclear, assuming he has them, weapons at say, Israel? He’d be blown straight to Allah. America? He’d be blown to Allah’s grandmother. He knows this. He won’t use them.
-
The thought of Saddam firing off a nuclear is bad enough as it is. What use is killing the soldier that lobs the grenade? Saddam knows this and it places him at an awfully good barginning position. Remember when the Soviet Union subjugated the Hungarians durinbg the Cold War? We were powerless to stop them because we knew the Soviets had nukes and they [Hungarians] weren’t worth it to risk nuclear annihilation over. Same goes with Iraq. Would you think twice if Saddam gave the terrorist a nuke to plant in your backyard?
-
My point is, he wont give anything to the terrorist in my back yard. Because, the second we find out, that Grenade lobber is going to get an airstrike up his ass.
-
As long as a no connection can be determined, all’s well for Saddam. Bsides, I’m not one to trust Saddam - he’ll use those nuclear weapons to rattle his saber.
-
My point is, he wont give anything to the terrorist in my back yard. Because, the second we find out, that Grenade lobber is going to get an airstrike up his ass.
I HATE getting airstrikes up my ass!!! :evil: :evil: :evil:
-
@TG:
As long as a no connection can be determined, all’s well for Saddam. Bsides, I’m not one to trust Saddam - he’ll use those nuclear weapons to rattle his saber.
However, he still knows if he wants to rattle his saber, we’re gonna nuke his saber. If a nuke showed up in NYC, even if Saddam had nothing to do with it, he’d be the first dictator taken out.
-
So now we have to wait until he nukes us before we can retaliate?
-
In my opinion, I think it’s long overdue that America stops being so passive against these attacks on our freedom. Our political leadership needs to wake up and recognize that MANY people do not like us, or our way of life. They are willing to kill civialians to get their point across, as they’ve already proved.
America needs to take the offensive against threats to our freedom! There is absolutely no reason to sit and wait until we get attacked again, to take action. Saddam is an IRRESPONSIBLE DICTATOR who possesses VERY POWERFUL and DEADLY weaponry. Such a person IS a threat to our safety (both directly and indirectly), regardless of what the liberals care to argue.
Does anyone really want Saddam to stay in power, honestly? (Besides the terrorist regimes) Please, I think the bigger question is why he SHOULD stay in power…
-
Well D:S - i ask the same question of our leadership as well. At the same time, i would be very offended by another country agreeing with me and replacing our leader with one of their own choosing (particularly if it were a nation with religious, political and cultural ideology so very far apart from our own).
Iraq is not attacking America’s freedom. Also there are many Europeans, Asians, Canadians, etc. who do not like America. This does not make these people threats to America, regardless of the potential weapons they possess.
To follow your reasoning, why stop at Iraq? There are too many other nations with a grudge against the US and the ability to do something about it. Even Canada has many reasons to begrudge the US and we have excellent access to American political etc. venues . . . it would be well for the US to eliminate this potential threat North of the border. Also i believe that Cretien, Bush, and Muggabe are equally nutty and dictatorial as Saddam - maybe a little more intelligent, maybe less, but 2 out of 4 have similar ideologies which means that we’ll be safe . . . for a while. . . . -
Iraq is not attacking America’s freedom. Also there are many Europeans, Asians, Canadians, etc. who do not like America. This does not make these people threats to America, regardless of the potential weapons they possess.
Hmmm… and I wonder why? Tell me, why are we going after Iraq than the other countries that simply don’t like us? Could it be because Saddam harbors and contributes money and weapons to terrorist and extremist?
To follow your reasoning, why stop at Iraq? There are too many other nations with a grudge against the US and the ability to do something about it. Even Canada has many reasons to begrudge the US and we have excellent access to American political etc. venues . . . it would be well for the US to eliminate this potential threat North of the border
Yep, those Canadians are dastardly ones - invading other countries, publicly voicing the destruction of Israel, and starving and gassing their own people. That sounds about right. :roll:
-
@TG:
So now we have to wait until he nukes us before we can retaliate?
:)
Latin helps:re-taliate…. “re” like in: re-ply, re-action, re-affirm, re-conquista …
usually somethign must happen before you can use any “re”-word…
So, it’s no wonder that you have to wait for him to hurt you before you can retaliate. -
@Deviant:Scripter:
In my opinion, I think it’s long overdue that America stops being so passive against these attacks on our freedom. …
America needs to take the offensive against threats to our freedom!There is a difference between attacks and threats. you can reply with violence against a violent attack. You can reply threatening to being threatened. If you attack while being threatened, you are the aggressor, unless you can prove without doubt that an attack on you was inevitable and would have happened soon. Up to now, no proof of that has been given out (just as Powell says, maybe you should try to convince your allies by showing them your “evidence”).
There is absolutely no reason to sit and wait until we get attacked again, to take action. Saddam is an IRRESPONSIBLE DICTATOR who possesses VERY POWERFUL and DEADLY weaponry. Such a person IS a threat to our safety (both directly and indirectly), regardless of what the liberals care to argue.
George W. is an irresponsible President. Such a person is a threat to the safety, rights and freedoms of everyone who is not american.
ratify Kyoto for mankinds sake!
Still, noone goes out and says: if you don’t stop that, we will come and kill you…… and i know how you would react if someone did! -
@TG:
Iraq is not attacking America’s freedom. Also there are many Europeans, Asians, Canadians, etc. who do not like America. This does not make these people threats to America, regardless of the potential weapons they possess.
Hmmm… and I wonder why? Tell me, why are we going after Iraq than the other countries that simply don’t like us? Could it be because Saddam harbors and contributes money and weapons to terrorist and extremist?
like it or not, many other nations do the same thing. Perhaps not at the level of government, but at some level they do. And you’re being very naive to think that Iraq’s gov’t is the only one doing this. America’s allies in the middle east i’m certain do not have the cleanest of hands in this matter.
To follow your reasoning, why stop at Iraq? There are too many other nations with a grudge against the US and the ability to do something about it. Even Canada has many reasons to begrudge the US and we have excellent access to American political etc. venues . . . it would be well for the US to eliminate this potential threat North of the border
Yep, those Canadians are dastardly ones - invading other countries, publicly voicing the destruction of Israel, and starving and gassing their own people. That sounds about right. :roll:
Did Iraq not get appropriately punished for this 10 years ago? How often must its citizens be punished for this? (As was argued earlier, regardless of the kindly American’s attempts to not kill them in an invasion, war inflicts misery on a country’s populace regardless of how they feel about the west.)
Should we not invade Germany and Japan? After all, they did invade other countries, and you can be certain that Germany would not only voice the destruction of Israel, they would be the only country to try and accomplish this.
Agreeing with F_alk on this one. A pre-emptive strike is kind of a nice idea in a way - prevents nasty things from happening for the next couple of years. Until the Iraqi’s are pissed off enough to act rather than jaw.
Suggested Topics
