U.S. Ships Tanks to Gulf, Bush to Make Case on Iraq

Reuters | 9/04/02 | Stefano Ambrogi

[VaBthang4]

""We have prevailed before and we will also prevail in Umm al-Ma'arik (the Mother of All Battles) in the end, God willing," Iraq's state television quoted Saddam as saying in an open letter to the Iraqi people."

This statement alone confirms the absolute need to remove Saddam....nobody is that stupid....he has to be a deranged monster.

[Reagan Man]

>>>Seriously though, I was joking about nuking them...

I didn't note a sarcasm tag.

>>>I would however issue a simple warning - next country to attack us gets erased.

Hmmm. Are you serious this time?

[Reagan Man]

>>>... but I don't understand your statements...

My remarks are pretty straight forward, pragmatic and reasonable. When the subject is the use of nuclear weapons, rushing to judgment is out of the question. There is a lot of international politics being played by an assortment of nations throughout the world.

You sound like a warmonger, ready to nuke any adversary and start WWIII. Thank God you're not in charge.

[Senator_Palpatine]

Goood...everything is proceeding as planned.Baghdad will soon be under my control..."

[Reagan Man]

>>>How much darker and more chaotic can the middle east be than today?

If the US was to nuke Saddam, it could very well open the flood gates and possibly ignite nuclear exchanges between other nations who have nuclear weapons capability, like Pakistan and India. Iraq could then attack Israel with WMD and Israel would retaliate. If you remember your physics, all out nuclear exchanges, would create a nuclear winter effect and throw the world into darkness and chaos.

[wimpycat]

LOL! Isn't it fun "translating" what politicians and diplomats say into what they're really saying?

[Reagan Man]

>>I went through your original comments and noted a difference of opinion.

That's what this is. A simple difference of opinion. But that doesn't mean you should jump to conclusions. I said in my post at RE:#15, Saddam must be taken out... and I meant it. If you want to overreact and come across as a warmonger, willing to use nukes at the drop of a dime feel free.

>>>You however resort to ill-founded suppositions and snide remarks.

No I haven't. I just don't agree with your warmongering rhetoric.

>>>You come off like an appeasing uneducated teenage weasel.

Hardly. But I suggest you knock off the insults.

[jwalsh07]

REFORGER

[Almondjoy]

First off you show how ignorant you really are. Nukes aren't a play toy fool? What are you asking for the end of the world? Let me ask you this.. do you believe God? Do you honestly believe the killing of innocent civilians is just for America's needs? If so you I good idea where your heading off after death. But regardless of what any ridiculous ideas you have of redemption you clearly have no concept of the world today.. are you lost back in 1945?

As for your 2nd point I'm not saying who's right and who's wrong.. that's the problem.. you think of the "morally equivalent" HAHAHAAHHAAHAHAHAH .. that's truely childish.. you think you have the moral high ground over China? What makes you so just.. you just wanted to slaughter a few million Iraq's because you don't want to see 50,000 American dead... If your God cares so little about life to give you the moral high ground on who lives and who dies.. you can have him.. but I'll tell you what... HE DOESNT EXIST!

[Almondjoy]

on 2nd review your racist comment shows exactly how intellgent you really are.. thanks for playing but you might want to check your watch because it's time for you to check out.

[lmr]

Dude, do what I do, ignore the "Nuke Iraq" people. It's alot easier. Why I don't think it will ever come to Nuclear Weapons, at the same time I feel that the emotion runs high enough sometimes that this is not an unreasonable reaction to the situation. Cooler heads prevail, on this board and in the world arena.

I for one am for regime change in Iraq. I would hope this happens sooner than later. If the Iraqi people are incapable of doing it themselves, then we need to do it for them. If a few civilians die, well, war is hell, we try our best to avoid it, the claptraps in the media and the peaceniks just need to shut up. When all is said and done the situation will be alot better and the Good Ol' U.S.A. will have actually saved lives in the long run. I am sure most sensible people will agree with me.

[Almondjoy]

Yes I very much agree with you. We need to go in. It's not the "nuke Iraq" people that bother me. When people come on here and talk about the moral high ground about any war situation it's like people don't understand God at all... of course people mistake my treat everyone has you would like to be treated attitude as a demowinnie but in reality I just at any situation like I think God would.. isn't that what we are suppose to do after all? Forgive I might be preaching to the wrong person but I know the other fool will be reading this.

[xzins]

Exactly! (You are a genius....you said it in one word!)

How about: TEAM SPIRIT!

[PhilDragoo]

We are shipping tanks and Daschle is stuffing more socks in his shoes and underwear.

Saddam is telling the people "We will win" and none has the balls to say, "What you mean, 'We', Camel's Rump?"

(Russia is rumored to have offered him asylum, and German engineers designed his deep bunker complex.)

Tariq Aziz tells Kofi the Klymer that Iraq is considering allowing inspectors.

Tariq, you disgusting Camel Dropping, we aren't getting jacked around in those little convoys of UNSCOM four-wheelers.

When we want to examine a site, we'll be calling it:

BOMB DAMAGE ASSESSMENT

thenkyewverramuch

[CreekerFreeper]

I would agree at some level with you about WW I. But, I think the driving force there was not the mobilization factor, which I have heard taught, but the secret treaties and counter-treaties the entwined the whole of the European continent between the ruling houses of Europe, which are all basically related.

These treaties were what resulted in the inevitable march toward war. Hence, Washington's warning about entangling alliances.

In my opinion, WW I was simply a war to destory the monarchies of Europe, which were all basically swept from the continent in 4 short years. Germany, Russia, Austro-Hungary, Ottoman Turks, Benelux countries. All these monarchies were swept from the throne or stripped of power because of their treaty-making fiasco.

[DB]

Ah... The solution to global warming...

[DB]

With a few localized hot spots...