Saddam Launches Pre-Emptive Attack

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Beefeater

On Thin Ice
Joined
Jan 12, 2003
Messages
47
-Reuters-
Baghdad, Iraq
Saddam Hussein is reportedly debating the possibility of a Pre-Emptive attack on US forces stationed in the Gulf or nearby Israel. US Intelligence has documented the movement of Iraqi scud missiles into Western and Southern Iraq. Such an attack would be without a UN Security Resolution authorizing the use of Force against Israel of the US forces stationed around Iraq, and would be perceived as a Uni-Lateral military move without the approval of the International Community.

_________

Also, I don't quite think I've seen the amount of bias that is the name of this Forum.. Sunday Bloody Sunday.... It is apparent that this forum is to discuss the Imminent US Action in Iraq, liberating the iraqi people from a murderous dictator, but to name it after a U2 song that memorializes the 'Mass Slaughter of 13 Irish Men' protesting Internment, Which no doubt is the intent to parallel the invading US forces with these British Paramilitary Units of 1972 is well.. kinda sick and very uninformed.

I would be inclined to think that this is just a coincidence, but the Peace sign in the Interference logo and the general makeup of this audience combined with the forum name has led me to believe otherwise.

Beefeater
 
Beefeater, I'm not sure about this. Elvis, or whoever, was just trying to think of a name for a new forum that had a U2 content. Every forum on here has some relation to something U2, some very specific and some quite vague. "Sunday Bloody Sunday" is the name of a U2 song, obviously, and if you look at the explanation at the end of the subject line, you'll notice that they've noted that this forum is for the war on terrorism. One could just as soon conclude that "Sunday Bloody Sunday" pertains to 9/11, the murderous event that started the whole thing. It need not be applied to the upcoming strike against Iraq. Some of us aren't convinced that Bush and Co. are really against a murderous dictator when there are murderous dictators all over the globe that they don't seem to give a damn about. I think Saddam is a :censored:, and I'm against him. He does *not* want peace.
 
Beefeater said:
-Reuters-
Baghdad, Iraq
Saddam Hussein is reportedly debating the possibility of a Pre-Emptive attack on US forces stationed in the Gulf or nearby Israel. US Intelligence has documented the movement of Iraqi scud missiles into Western and Southern Iraq. Such an attack would be without a UN Security Resolution authorizing the use of Force against Israel of the US forces stationed around Iraq, and would be perceived as a Uni-Lateral military move without the approval of the International Community.

Good piece of satirical comedy.

Speaking of unilateral preemptive attacks without UN Security Council authorization or approval...

never mind..
 
Beefeater said:
Also, I don't quite think I've seen the amount of bias that is the name of this Forum.. Sunday Bloody Sunday.... It is apparent that this forum is to discuss the Imminent US Action in Iraq, liberating the iraqi people from a murderous dictator, but to name it after a U2 song that memorializes the 'Mass Slaughter of 13 Irish Men' protesting Internment, Which no doubt is the intent to parallel the invading US forces with these British Paramilitary Units of 1972 is well.. kinda sick and very uninformed.

I would be inclined to think that this is just a coincidence, but the Peace sign in the Interference logo and the general makeup of this audience combined with the forum name has led me to believe otherwise.

Beefeater

I don't think there's any parallel between Bloody Sunday and an invasion of Iraq either. After all, the Brits murdered 13 people there and the last Gulf War killed over 100,000 Iraqi people. Besides, the British have been screwing Ireland over for the last 800 years and more, while the US is comparatively new to the Middle East.

And about the peace sign, I fail to understand how anyone can object to a symbol of PEACE. Once you start to claim a symbol of peace is anti-US or anti-military then you imply that the US and the US and its military are only interested in warmongering. As for the "general make-up of this audience" - the majority of people in the world are opposed to war on Iraq so on that issue I'd say this forum is fairly representative of public opinion. In any case, what do you suggest? That someone checks people's political affiliation before they register to make sure there are an equal number of pacifists and warmongers, Republicans and Democrats, pro-choicers and pro-lifers etc? Clearly that's impossible, and I believe there are very few people who would consider it desirable.
 
if you want to continue debating the merits of the new sub-forum title, you may do so here.

otherwise, this thread has one more chance to get back to discussion on the satirical article lemonite posted.
 
Beefeater:

From my point of view that would be self defense, if Iraq would send their troops close to the US border and start to test their weapons and talking about an attack (or preemptive defense) it would be self defense too if the US would strike back (look in the UN Charta).

Klaus
 
Last edited:
I agree. Anything Sadaam does in the next few days has to be labeled self-defense. After all he has 312.000 troops surrounding his country, that has repeatedly said leave us alone.

I don't think some people understand the severity of what we are about to do. Anyone can point to history to say "this country did this ect". We are supposedly in an enlightened era of human history. Any pointing to the past is "wrong".

How can we as humans on this planet called Earth make it the best and equal it can be. How can we feed our hungry, clothe our poor and heal our sick. These are the questions that should be facing the UN.

Not is one freakin man (no make that two ******* Bush) going to cause a 3rd world war, whether in a traditional sense or not.

I understand we have lots of idealogyies and theories here on this board. I doubt that anyone here can deny tthey would rather be doing healing things rather than war.

(sorry for the rant)
 
Scarletwine said:
I agree. Anything Sadaam does in the next few days has to be labeled self-defense. After all he has 312.000 troops surrounding his country, that has repeatedly said leave us alone.

I don't think some people understand the severity of what we are about to do. Anyone can point to history to say "this country did this ect". We are supposedly in an enlightened era of human history. Any pointing to the past is "wrong".

How can we as humans on this planet called Earth make it the best and equal it can be. How can we feed our hungry, clothe our poor and heal our sick. These are the questions that should be facing the UN.

Not is one freakin man (no make that two ******* Bush) going to cause a 3rd world war, whether in a traditional sense or not.

I understand we have lots of idealogyies and theories here on this board. I doubt that anyone here can deny tthey would rather be doing healing things rather than war.

(sorry for the rant)

That's OK. I think these are tough times for all of us, no matter what our opinion on Iraq is. I agree with alot of this post. I'm worried about a war, about the economy, about everything. I have this feeling that everything's falling apart, and who in hell can fix this mess? I don't know of anyone who can fix it. There's no one available for the job on the planet. It's total despair. There's no hope. And that really sucks.
 
Back
Top Bottom