The US SUCKS because... - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-28-2002, 12:21 PM   #61
Rock n' Roll Doggie
DrTeeth's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Q continuum
Posts: 4,769
Local Time: 03:25 PM

Originally posted by STING2
...More important than this is why wait when your actions could prevent massive loss of life in this country in the future. I ask the people that do not want to go after Iraq with out "clear" evidence what will you say if there is a more devistating attack in the future than 9/11 by a terror organization that is later found to be aided and supplied by Iraq. The fact would be that if we had gone after Iraq earlier, we could have prevented the terrible event.
Does the term 'innocent untill proven guilty' ring a bell. You honestly think it's allright to invade countries based on a hunch? What if the US would invade Iraq and won't find evidence linking them to terrorists?

Let's say the US invades Iraq and overthrows Saddam? I think I've heard that the majority of the Iraqi people is still behind Saddam. Is the US going to occupy Iraq forever (be prepared forsuicide bombers than...) or installing some puppet regime?

And what about some of the things on z edge's list?
Originally posted by z edge
Iraq is:
Guilty of developing weapons of mass destruction with intent of terror
Guilty of funding/promoting suicide bombers in Israel
Guilty of Funding and/or Planning terrorist acts against the USA.
What proof do you have that Saddam has the intent to terror with weapons of mass destruction? Do you think only the Western countries have the right to posses these weapons?
And what about the last two items of your list? If the US or any country can produce evidence to back this up, I'm all for military action including the ERS. But if there's no evidence to back up these claims, I don't see the legitimacy of an invasion.

BTW I would love to believe that Bush want Saddam's head on a stick because he would be guilty of starving his own people, but I don't think the US government really cares about that. Bush is just peeing his panties at the thought of countries having nuclear weapons other than the US.

DrTeeth is offline  
Old 06-28-2002, 12:30 PM   #62
BEAL's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Des Moines
Posts: 2,460
Local Time: 01:25 PM
I'm all for other countries to have the bomb. But when countries have a leader like Sadam, I don't think it's the best idea to allow him or others to pursue these type of weapons. I don't think you can argue that he is a reasonable, caring man. There is proof that he's funded 25-50k to the families of palasestinian bombers. As for the mass destruction...i dunno. He has chemical and biological weapons which are bad enough. But to his credit, he hasn't used them on us or other countries....just his own.

Do you think if terrorists were given a nuke that they would hesistate to use it?

I do agree with a lot of what you're saying, but you cannot deal with these type of people by negotiating. They hate everything the U.S stands for, no matter what our policies are.

So I think we should be entitled to a little agressiveness.

BEAL is offline  
Old 06-28-2002, 01:40 PM   #63
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:25 PM
Saddam Hussian used chemical weapons in a limited way against Iranian troops in the Iran/Iraq war from 1980-1988. Just wanted to make that clear.

When it comes to intelligence on what Iraq may or may not be doing, the USA has by far the best intelligence. The invasion of Iraq to overthrow Saddam is to prevent the possible linkage with a terrorist organization in the future. This should be done to prevent a great tragedy from occuring in the future. The evidence that this is necessary is overwhelming, his past behavior and actions are all the evidence that is needed. Saddam has already demonstrated by his actions, especially since 1980 that he is a threat to the international community. The several parliment members he murdered back in 1979 when he assumed leadership of the Iraqi government is reason enough to take him out. But add to that his invasions of Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the threaten invasion Israel, and then bombing of Israel with Scud Missiles, disobeying the Gulf War Cease-fire terms which he agreed to, then you have the most compelling case for the overthrow of a government in perhaps the last 50 years. Saddams actions have robbed the region and much of the world of peace and security. Plus, he has violated and failed to comply with the Gulf War ceace-fire terms. The only reason are military stopped its advance in Iraq in 1991 was because he signed the agreement. He has broken the terms and that alone gives us the right to invade. Saddam is a criminal, and it is undisputed that he is guilty of the above.

The Majority of the people of Iraq want Saddam Hussain overthrown. That cannot do it themselves because Saddam controls the army, the government and the media. The people of Iraq are hostages. There is no democracy in Iraq, its a dictatorship. Saddam does not govern with the consent of the governed.

A US invasion of Iraq is in fact the best thing that could happen to the Iraqi's in their long term future. It would require installing a democratic government and Billions of dollars of aid, plus US military forces to protect the country from the likes of Syria and Iran. Under our protection, the Iraqi economy could again become the most prosperous in the region as it was 30 years ago. Iraq with the power provided by its rivers and large oil reserves, plus one of the more secular societies in mid-east, could develop into a very wealthy society if Saddam is removed and political and economic development can occur. The best thing that can happen to a country if invaded by the USA, is that they stay and overthrow the government and allow a democracy and free market economy to develop. Thats what happened with Germany and Japan. The USA invaded, took down the dictatorship, installed a democracy and promoted a free market economy. I don't see the Germans and Japanese complaining. No suicide bombers either! Two of the wealthiest democracies on the planet after the USA. By the way, suicide bombing is the idea of extreme elements that sieze the hearts of the desperate. An invasion of Iraq would be to sieze those extreme elements and provide wealth and opportunity to the desperate just as we did in Germany and Japan.

Notice the USA has no desire to invade India because it has nuclear weapons, so the idea that George Bush or anyone else is peeing their panties because other countries have nuclear weapons is absurd. Its a countries leaderships behavior and actions that justify concern and if need be invasion to head off a disaster. You should be peeing your panties too if Saddam Hussain has or gets a nuclear weapon.

The proof that we have that Saddam has the intent of terror with weapons of mass destruction is his actual use against Kurds and Iranians to do just that!

Saddam has gone on national telivision multiple times offering the families of Suicide Bombers 25,000 dollars a piece and encouraging more money to support the campaign and asking other countries to get involved.

As far as funding terror attacks against the USA, the invasions of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are ones because of our interdependent economies. He already held hundreds of US civilians hostage in late 1990 and put them at military targets as human shields. How can you say that is not terror? In addition, an Iraqi fighter pilot launched an anti-ship missile at the USS Starke in 1987 causing enormous damage and loss of life. It was labeled as a mistake, but many think the evidence suggest otherwise, rather testing the waters on US reactions to certain events.

Bottom line, there are few invasions that would have more legitamacy than this one. The only reason the USA has not done it in the past is the cost. Today though, the growing risk of not invading is starting to outweigh the cost!

STING2 is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:25 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright ©