Saddam Says NO! to BLIX - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
View Poll Results: If Saddam does not destroy the missiles what do you think should happen?
US/UN to War for Violations of 687 13 76.47%
Us/UN Increase Sanctions against Iraq 1 5.88%
US to War without UN 3 17.65%
Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-24-2003, 09:57 PM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 03:47 PM
Saddam Says NO! to BLIX

Saddam is as of tonight refusing to begin destroying the missiles that Hans Blix has ordered Iraq to destroy because they are in violation of the banned weapons listed in Security Council Resolution 687 (Cease-Fire Agreement).

If he does not destroy the missles what do you think should happen?
__________________

Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-24-2003, 10:15 PM   #2
Purgatory
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,445
Local Time: 02:47 PM
more sanctions means more suffering, sanctions dont work, saddam is just as healthy in every way as he used to be. his people on the other hand, are not.

and just how are you going to rally a country to rise up against your "president" if your the ones who have trade sanctions slapped on them?
__________________

Gickies Gageeze is offline  
Old 02-24-2003, 10:20 PM   #3
Kid A
 
The Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Holy Roman Empire
Posts: 5,271
Local Time: 03:47 PM
well everything with the UN is optional, so it's up to Saddam to disarm in good faith if and when he feels like it, I mean after all, it's self defense!
The Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-24-2003, 10:33 PM   #4
Purgatory
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,445
Local Time: 02:47 PM
thats just it.

with the states on their door, and with everyone in the world knowing theyre about to attack, would it make ANY sense for them to disarm those missiles NOW? ofcourse not! it would be absurd if he disarmed anything like that now, knowing he will need whatever he can muster to thwart an imminent american attack.

now dont get me wrong. i believe those missiles should be gone, but a garauntee of peace will be needed.
Gickies Gageeze is offline  
Old 02-24-2003, 10:40 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:47 PM
I think you should have redone the options. I picked the US/UN should go to war if Saddam violates UN obligations, but I would support the US going to war if UN did not approve the action. Also, even if the UN does not vote for military action, there are already tens of thousands of British troops in Kuwait or on the way to Kuwait in addition to several thousand Australian troops, so its not just the USA. There will be a coalition without the UN if they do not vote for military action.
STING2 is offline  
Old 02-24-2003, 10:48 PM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 03:47 PM
Sting, I hate making polls. I hate making quizes for my students. THe Coalition of the Willing will be led by the US. Let's not kid ourselves. There is no war without the US.

I picked US/UN as well. I was waiting for you to point out the flaws with the Sanctions hurting the Iraqi people. You want to enlighten the thread or shall I?

LOL
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 06:04 AM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 03:47 PM
Come on people....answer the poll. Yes I know there are more choices we would all like to add. In my humble opinion, these are the three that are most likely to happen.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 09:51 AM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 03:47 PM
Hmmm...awful quiet today.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 09:59 AM   #9
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,961
Local Time: 03:47 PM
i voted for the first option.

sanctions are worthless.
Screaming Flower is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 10:05 AM   #10
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 03:47 PM
I can't ever vote in polls. But I don't like any of the answers. Sanctions are only strengthening his position as people are so dependant on the Gov't.
I suppose #1 is the best of the bunch. Definitely against the third.
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 10:05 AM   #11
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 17,786
Local Time: 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
Come on people....answer the poll. Yes I know there are more choices we would all like to add. In my humble opinion, these are the three that are most likely to happen.
Well in that case, your question should have been: "What do you think WILL happen?" not "What do you think SHOULD happen?"

Maybe it's picky, but there's certainly a difference, wouldn't you agree?
anitram is online now  
Old 02-25-2003, 10:13 AM   #12
On Thin Ice
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 47
Local Time: 08:47 PM

I'd be interested in hearing any alternative punitive measures to be imposed on Saddam rather than sanctions?..

Beefeater
__________________
80 Proof
Beefeater is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 11:48 AM   #13
On Thin Ice
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 47
Local Time: 08:47 PM

Sanctions are only worthless as Saddam cares not one bit what happens to his people, However the people suffer as much as they do because Saddam takes the money from his Oil Sales et al, and uses them to finance his desires for WMD.

It is confusing to see that people miss that Saddam is the great evil here.



Beefeater
__________________
80 Proof
Beefeater is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 11:55 AM   #14
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:47 PM
If sanctions are worthless (and I believe they are as Saddam stays insulated from their effect), how will continued inspections motivate him?????
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 02:03 PM   #15
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 09:47 PM
Iraq says they havent decided yet wether to destroy these rockets or not. They are still talking with UN and Blix.
They are a little confused, because exactly these rockets were confirmed to not violate the UN resolutions in February.
The difference might be that in February they calculated the distance of the Rockets including a warhead and this time without.

This is not my Opinion, just a press release translated to english.

A comment to the poll:

No matter if we think a war is the answer or not:
If military action is the answer it should be under control of the UN. Preferably with some troops of Arab countries in control. That would increase the chances for success (not of the war, it should be easy for the US to win against a country which has been internationally boycotted for 10-15 years and had no chance to buy big weapon systems). But for the aftet war phase. Problems won't be solved and Democracy only works if the people like that idea. Look at Pakistan that just starting democracy dosn't work.

It would also be helpful to convince the other big european contries if US and Britain don't want to do Nation Building (aprox. 10.000.000.000 $ ?) alone.

Klaus
Klaus is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 04:15 PM   #16
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Tough call. This is a complex problem with (possibly) no real "solutions". I don't like sanctions. They are hurting the Iraqi people, but I'll be damned if they're hurting Saddam. How many blasted palaces does the guy have?? If someone stuck a gun at me and forced me to pick I suppose it'd be #1.
verte76 is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 04:15 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Even if the USA goes in with a coalition of the willing rather than the UN blessing, the UN will be there in the aftermath. Thats what happened in Kosovo. In terms of nation building, I can't think of another third world country that is in a better position long term for economic development than Iraq. The Worlds second largest oil reserves in addition to two very large rivers provide lots of natural resources that people in the former Yugoslavia and Afghanistan can only dream about.
STING2 is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 04:25 PM   #18
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 09:47 PM
STING2: youre right, Iraq is financialy in a great shape, my comparision to Pakistan wasn't because of the money, but how long democracy "survived" there - petty fast the military got the power there - then UN -> put it back to democracy, then they voted for the military dictator .

All i'm going to say is:
Be careful you can only teach democracy by living it, and get the people to a point where they really want it.
The end of the iraq war might be the begining of the real problems.

Klaus
Klaus is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 05:25 PM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Perhaps we can help the Iraqi people use their resources to make their country prosperous. I admit that this is probably impossible as long as Saddam is in control. The people are screwed because he doesn't give a damn about his people. One question is, though, can military action take Saddam out? Not necessarily. Desert Storm obviously didn't take him out. Two wars didn't take Slobodan Milosevic out of the former Yugoslavia. I despised Milosevic, and I despise Saddam. These guys are both jerks. The Great Dictator Quandry continues.
verte76 is offline  
Old 02-25-2003, 06:02 PM   #20
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 09:47 PM
verte: right - and also it's nice that the taliban don't rule afghanistan anymore Ossama is still a free man. We have no clue where he lives, if he lives and what his next plans are.
Maybee that's too scary for our people, so we entertain them with a war against Saddam?

Klaus
__________________

Klaus 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 03:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×