The Iraq war. - Page 3

Tom Earp · #1 04-03-2006, 05:38 PM

First or second behind North Viet Nam, or China?

There seems to be no end to Ass Hats who will want to controll the Peed ons and have power!

AXEAM · #2 04-03-2006, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
Who would support that war? The Europeans? They don't want any war that would harm their business interests and the Russians were busy providing intelligence to Iraqi forces on the US. The Chinese? They'd rape their mothers for 5 yuan and a little more global influence.

And I have no idea what happened to all those weapons that Saddam used to have but what happens if we did go to Iran and there were no weapons?

I guess we gotta start somewhere and we started with Iraq. But someone decided the US needed to give charity and fix the country after we toppled the government and now we're paying too much. I'd support a war in Iran only if our men didn't go in.

-Rudey

Many of the above mention didn't support the Iraq war...but that train left the station anyway. As for the WMDs I really don't think he had them but b/c Iran was really packing I believe he had to maintain a bluff card.

Rudey · #3 04-03-2006, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AXEAM
Many of the above mention didn't support the Iraq war...but that train left the station anyway. As for the WMDs I really don't think he had them but b/c Iran was really packing I believe he had to maintain a bluff card.

He had them at some point. We've got at least some of the receipts and France, Russia and China probably have binders full of them.

I'm just saying America doing anything would be lose-lose both at home and abroad.

-Rudey

AXEAM · #4 04-03-2006, 09:42 PM

I think if America would have used all of it's resources to go after Bin-Laden and found him instead of going to war w/ Iraq it would have been a win-win situation.

Rudey · #5 04-04-2006, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AXEAM
I think if America would have used all of it's resources to go after Bin-Laden and found him instead of going to war w/ Iraq it would have been a win-win situation.

What would we have done? Created a giant search party with 200,000 troops to walk around the deserts and mountains.

-Rudey

macallan25 · #6 04-04-2006, 06:22 PM

Good point, not to mention that we could have taken out Bin Laden during the Clinton Administration but he f*cked that one up.

AXEAM · #7 04-05-2006, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
What would we have done? Created a giant search party with 200,000 troops to walk around the deserts and mountains.

-Rudey

Maybe about 80,000 troops, I believe that would be more then enough to find him.

Rudey · #8 04-05-2006, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AXEAM
Maybe about 80,000 troops, I believe that would be more then enough to find him.

And if you found Osama what would happen?

-Rudey

AXEAM · #9 04-05-2006, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
And if you found Osama what would happen?

-Rudey

The first thing it would do is make the so called war on terrorism look legit also by capturing Bin-Laden(The poster boy for terrorism) it would make many of the love ones of 911 victims feel some sense of relief.

Rudey · #10 04-05-2006, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AXEAM
The first thing it would do is make the so called war on terrorism look legit also by capturing Bin-Laden(The poster boy for terrorism) it would make many of the love ones of 911 victims feel some sense of relief.

Listen I agree that we need to catch him and punish him. I do.

But in terms of preventing something, catching him wouldn't stop the cells all over the world that operate independently from working. So I don't see how it would bring legitimacy to a war on terror when really catching Osama is a war of punishment.

-Rudey

AXEAM · #11 04-12-2006, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
Listen I agree that we need to catch him and punish him. I do.

But in terms of preventing something, catching him wouldn't stop the cells all over the world that operate independently from working. So I don't see how it would bring legitimacy to a war on terror when really catching Osama is a war of punishment.

-Rudey

I don't believe that catching Bin-Laden would be a war on punishment but it would be a blow to the so call war on terrorism (I use the term so call b/c any war on terrorism that won't address the Saudi Kingdom is bogus) that's my opinion.

It was also revealed that the mobile labs found in Iraq in the early stages of the war were not used to build or move WMDs....also Colin Powell is changing his tune about the reasons for the war.