OT..Here comes the Boom.

[logic]

Yeah, I'd say within the next 3 days.
Or by monday the skies over Iraq will be blackend with War.

Like my uncle Tex used to say "shoot first and ask questions later".

Great words from a strong man!

bang your antiwar bongo drums and protest. But get out of the way because theres a new shierf in town and his name is George.
Bush and his bang up crew are getting down to bussiness.
With or without you, after it's all said and done, things WILL NOT change.There will be no boycot or sanction against the United States. That would be like stabbing yourself in the arm.because we would impose are own sanctions and it boils down to the fact thats it's better to be united with us than against us. otherwise WE ALL suffer. (us too)

It will be Quick and fast (more bombs dropped in the first 24 hour than the whole gulf war)and forgotten.
(people still protest the first gulf war and Yugoslavia---NOT)

If you want to you can rant and rave to no avail.
It's gonna happen, get used to it.

It's all sad but true.

The last of the US Battle ships are entering the Red sea.
Theres gotta be a better way to spend a nice Saturday than waisting your valueable time protesting.

Oh, and have a nice day

[Laughing Cow]

Don't belief that the war is over when the shooting stops.

[logic]

Well hello Laughing Cow.
Nice Day.
Yep, It sure is a nice day for a WAR

[logic]

I'm sorry
I'm just screwin around with you.

I've been drinking quite a few tonight and tomorrow I might regret what I said.

Anyway :

[PHILBERT]

Originally posted by logic
I'm sorry
I'm just screwin around with you.

I've been drinking quite a few tonight and tomorrow I might regret what I said.

Anyway :

Hehe, looks like it.

The way I view it is this: While he will never have as much power as Hitler, he might just become him. Think about it, the United States, Britain and France had the chance to stop Hitler in his rise to power easily. He was constatnly breaking rules of the Treaty of Versalles (or however it is spelled). He was creating a huge army, populating areas that were not to be, even invading other countries, but we just stood bye and watched. He may of created an atomic bomb if given time and would of used it on us.

Now here is a man who has killed his own people in weapons tests and others. If given the chance to have a nuclear weapon, think he'll take it or say "Oh no, the United Nations said I can't have a WMD, so I won't build a nuclear weapon..." If we don't kill the guy now and end his dictatorship, in 1 year a nuke might go off in Washington D.C.

[StarBoy]

While he will never have as much power as Hitler, he might just become him.


By "he", do you mean Hussein or Bush? I get the two mixed up all the time. :p

[SaMantis]

I agree that the danger from Hussein is real, but I think an important question is what will we (the U.S.) become by taking these preemptive measures?

Both Germany and Japan took "preemptive" measures against "aggressor" countries in WWII - against Russia and China, respectively. Their true aims were for territory and resources - f*ck the people.

Bush says all he wants is a "regime change." That's pretty nebulous.

Get rid of Hussein - fine. Install a new government - fine. But is the Bush administration really committed to democracy in Iraq? If that commitment isn't fulfilled, the U.S. will look 10 times worse than it does now. And good luck trying to get UN support for anything in the future, if we don't follow through with that promise.

[Marky]

SaMantis,

"Get rid of Hussein - fine. Install a new government - fine. But is the Bush administration really committed to democracy in Iraq? If that commitment isn't fulfilled, the U.S. will look 10 times worse than it does now. And good luck trying to get UN support for anything in the future, if we don't follow through with that promise." SM

I agree that Bush couldn't POSSIBLY just be looking for a regime change in Iraq. But as long as we find the weapons that Saddam still claims he doesn't have, then Bush has done his job by protecting the US as far as I'm concerned. Some will argue that Saddam's weapons are no threat to the US (makes sense.....), that just happens to be where I disagree.

But don't worry, the German and the Russian governments (probably the French and Chinese, too) have already stated, "If the US and Britain find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that can be traced back to us, it's because the CIA planted them there!" Yeah, they covered their backs, all right.

As far as getting UN support for anything in the future.... every other country in the UN has done things just like the US is doing now. The difference is, when THEY ask for support, and the UN says no, they just go ahead and do it instead of asking 18 more times.

[GLW]

History is written by the winners. It is viewed by the perspective of the culture and person looking at it.

A 20 minute war for a 50 year recovery.... And a possibility of not being any safer than we were before.

We have cops in just about every city in the US that are not above throw down weapons.

We have already had an instance of documents being used as proof that were revealed as forgeries.

If we go in, no matter what, there WILL be weapons found. If they exist, they will be found. If they do not exist, the loss of face will require that they be found.

The time to reflect and pause is now because once it starts, we are all committed and all US citizens outside of US soil are targets. Once you begin, you finish the job...so how you choose to begin or if you begin at all is the question.

Funny...right now people in the US are saying the UN should do its job. It should back up its resolutions.

Not too many years ago, the sentiment from the same population was that membership in the UN was bad because the UN could require the US to become invovled in and send troops to a war that we did not really have an interest in. Funny how time changes perspectives.

[logic]

Well said

[SaMantis]

good points from both GLW and Marky, and food for thought. Thanks.