Could someone explain the situation in Iraq more clearly to me:

I'm a bit ignorant when it comes to world news.
I think i'm missing something. here's the info i have:

- Bush thinks Iraq is a threat.
- Bush wants to go to war with Iraq
- Bush requests to let weapon inspectors in
- Saddam accepts.
- Bush still wants to go to war.
- The U.N doesn't want Bush to go in.
- Bush still wants to go to war because saddam has chemical weapons.

I DONT FUCKIN UNDERSTAND THIS.

Why do you wanna go to a war with someone with chemical weapons???

that's like seeing a ninja with a sword on his back walking down the street, minding his own business. So this other ninja with the exact same sword on his back goes, 'DUDE THAT SWORD IS DANGEROUS' so he goes to sword duel with the ninja.

Bush probably has a group of illegal covert ops in Iraq right now that are telling him about Saddams nukes and shit... but he can't tell us that, or else he'd be arrested or something...

... that would explain why he's so bent on fighting, and not inspecting

Let me break it down for you:

Bush wants to go to war with Iraq, and there's not a single fucking thing you can do about it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by sleeveboy
Let me break it down for you:

Bush wants to go to war with Iraq, and there's not a single fucking thing you can do about it.

---

yes... i know im not trying to stop him am i? does it look like im taking names down?

Why is Iraq all of a sudden a threat? they haven’t so much as touched America in over a decade.

Oh wait...that's right...this is about OIL.

Stop terrorism? pffft...Bush IS a fucking terrorist. Don't believe everything that you read. He's not stopping terror, he's creating it so that he can get more oil for our lazy ass country.

There's a perfectly understandable reason for this. Bush is a hick with a small dick.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TNLthugg
yes... i know im not trying to stop him am i? does it look like im taking names down?

Why is Iraq all of a sudden a threat? they haven’t so much as touched America in over a decade.

Oh wait...that's right...this is about OIL.

Stop terrorism? pffft...Bush IS a fucking terrorist. Don't believe everything that you read. He's not stopping terror, he's creating it so that he can get more oil for our lazy ass country.

---

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....oh wait wait wait. So you start a thread claiming ignorance, just so you can reel in a few responses, and then jump on your soap box? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

I don't agree with a lot of views regarding this, but at least other people have more tact to just come out and say it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TNLthugg

Oh wait...that's right...this is about OIL.

---

Wait a second....isn't that what the war over there back in '91 was all about?

Operation Get Those Filthy Animals Oil?

Fuck both Bush administrations.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by EThugg
There's a perfectly understandable reason for this. Bush is a hick with a small dick.

---

Well I guess Cheney is kind of small....
----
Oh yeah the thing with Iraq is about 3 things: Revenge(his father),Money(Oil),Power(To gain better political support from the populous)

:lol:

Sadam has the boom booms and only we can have the boom booms before he makes them go boom on us... or... something. I don't know I just saw an oppourtounity to use the term "boom booms" and TOOK IT!

~Mr. K~

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....oh wait wait wait. So you start a thread claiming ignorance, just so you can reel in a few responses, and then jump on your soap box? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

I don't agree with a lot of views regarding this, but at least other people have more tact to just come out and say it.

---

:wtf:

after making this thread i talked to some peeps and read some stuff about this and a lot of stuff says its about oil and revenge or what ever. other wise i would of redid it. :sweat: can i go home?

LEts see... Bush has money invested in oil.. so i wonder who's gonna benfit from this.. lets think really hard..

The economy is shit.. and instead of trying to fix shit.. his trying to get a diversion... by a US teroist Attack on Iraq.. so then the us can put another dictator similar to Suddan,, which the US put in place.. after the people democartacly elected a sociolist presedient.., after bush makes enough money.. we send anthor military coop, to put a new one... its the cycle of AMerican imperlism..

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TNLthugg
:wtf:

after making this thread i talked to some peeps and read some stuff about this and a lot of stuff says its about oil and revenge or what ever. other wise i would of redid it. :sweat: can i go home?

---

if I can have a cookie

*finds a cookie*

yum...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by maruchan
LEts see... Bush has money invested in oil.. so i wonder who's gonna benfit from this.. lets think really hard..

The economy is shit.. and instead of trying to fix shit.. his trying to get a diversion... by a US teroist Attack on Iraq.. so then the us can put another dictator similar to Suddan,, which the US put in place.. after the people democartacly elected a sociolist presedient.., after bush makes enough money.. we send anthor military coop, to put a new one... its the cycle of AMerican imperlism..

---

Actually, imperialism is more like the Philipines, or how Hong Kong was.

im proud if you guys. a smart bunch here.

and the penis thing, i believe this to be true, everyone knows the dude with the littlest weenie starts all the shit (everyone has at least one little buffed friend exactly like this, dont lie to me).


btw:
at our current rate of oil usage, there are about 50 years of oil left under this sweet Earth, get the cash while you can...right?

Gongos, its hard to be serious with the idiocracy that is the in the white house right now. Just like its hard to make a serious comment about the police trying to stop "god" in the DC area. There is always a better way of solving anything these days. Mind you that I've been drinking. yea.

Drinking Duvel I hope ;)

I want no war, but if it ends at Iraq (which I have strong doubts that it will not) then I am at ease with it.

I don't want WW3.

ºTracer

He, no Duvel, Saturday is when I shall have it. I was at a bar tonight that doesn't serve that kind of stuff. Just domestic beer and rail mixers. don't worry I shall have it...Soon...

It's all about the fact Iraq won't make deals with the U.S. and has the potental to effect world oils prices. It has virtaully nothing to do with morality. There are all sorts of evil assholes out there the US does nothing about. If we have a war with Iraq it will be purely over the fact they don't want to play ball with the U.S.

This weapon inspection stuff is crap. When the hell has the UN sent a weopon inspector into the US, Russia, China or England? Trying to say he is a terrorist is even more crap.

Quote:

---

that has yet to reprimand Arafat, despite the number of civilian casualties his constituants have inflicted on israel, yet censures israel when they strike back.

---

does the UN support these "constituants"? It wouldn't make sense to reprimand Arafat unless they believe that he is connected with them. At least, it is the Israeli military that is attacking, so any fist shaking from the UN regarding the Israeli military should be directed at the Israeli government.

the only thing I'm wondering about is that the US was claiming that they wanted to go to war because they weren't allowed to have inspections. And when Hussein said that he would allow inspections, they jumpstarted and apparently want to get the go-ahead for an attack before the inspections started up.

Ok, I'm not gonna say that Bush doesn't have a vested interest in the oil currently under Iraq and the rest of the Middle East. But to say that we should leave Iraq alone, because they haven't done a thing to us is wrong. That's the same attitude people had about Germany prior to World War 2. It's the same attitude people had about Afganistan prior to September of last year. Do not kid yourself. Just because he hasn't done anything we can prove yet doesn't mean he won't. Letting a 2 bit dictator who has ALREADY used chemical weapons against his OWN people obtain a working nuclear capability is just insane. You sit there and say give peace a chance, they've agreed to let the inspectors back in, fine. Do you know why they were sent home in the first place? Because Iraq was dicking with us, saying we couldnt go into certain places because they were Sadaam's private palaces, meanwhile they were working feverishly inside to build their bomb.

The reason why we should take him out is really quite simple. Not doing so could easily result in the deaths of millions of people. Then what would you be crying about? Oh boohoo, New York just got vaporized, why didnt we do something to stop that madman?? You people have learned nothing from what others are willing to do to you apparently.

I do not want war, believe it or not. But to blindly say that Saddam hasn't done anything to us and therefore should be left alone, or that Bush is just doing this for the money is so fucking ignorant it's not even funny. Let the inspectors go in, let them do their jobs. But if they are impeded, like they will be, then drop a smart bomb on where ever the heck Saddam is hiding and end his desire for revenge. Khaddafi learned his lesson when Reagan did it to him, haven't heard a word out of him since.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Error
It's the same attitude people had about Afganistan prior to September of last year. Do not kid yourself. Just because he hasn't done anything we can prove yet doesn't mean he won't. Letting a 2 bit dictator who has ALREADY used chemical weapons against his OWN people obtain a working nuclear capability is just insane.

---

eh, some good points made, but know your facts.

1.Afghanistan had nothing to do with Sep 11th, all the alleged hijackers were from Saudi Arabia as is bin Laden, and as far as the Taliban, just last June we gave them over 60 billion US dollars....hmmm.....

2. There are far more dangerous countries with "proven" nuclear capabilities than Iraq, China, North Korea, India, and last but not least Israel. To look past the hypocrisy of invading Iraq is idiotic at best.

3. Saddam Hussein did indeed try out chemical weapons on people in his country, they were not Iraqis, they were Kurds, a minority ethnic group in the Middle East, the US does not care about them either and our troops stood by while a group of Kurds was gunned down by Iraqi helicopters after the Gulf War had just ended...i saw the footage on Nightline last year.

as far a country trying out weapons on their own citizens the US is notorious for this...
go here...ABC news reports....

4. Dont forget who first gave Saddam Hussein his biological weapons...the US.

go here

Yeah, you are right, Al Quida were a bunch of Saudis. But they were holed up in the nation of Afganistan. To be honest I think the whole midde east needs to be cleaned out or excised from the rest of the world, there is just too much hate. But thats not possible right now, so we deal with it the best way we can. When somebody attacks you, you find the source of the problem and take it out, piece by piece. Taliban controled Afgahnistan -> Al Quida, then if you find more info leading to others who have helped attack you, say, IRAQ, then you move in and finish them off. Step by step.

"There are far more dangerous countries with "proven" nuclear capabilities than Iraq, China, North Korea, India, and last but not least Israel." Ok. I'm really not a fan of Israel, I never really have been, but they have the right to defend themselves. They don't usually start wars. So when nations around them such as Iran and Iraq, Syria, Egypt start preaching the good word of wiping the Israeli nation from the face of the earth what do you think they are going to do? Twiddle their thumbs and say ok, go ahead, destroy all that we are or ever will be? To even include Isreal in this list of supposed dangerous nations, I can't begin to fathom how twisted your sense of right and wrong is. Sorry, that sounds flamish, I don't mean it to be, but there it is.

All of the other nations you mentioned, not to mention other such nations with these weapons, like Pakistan, or Khazikstan, or Russia, haven't expressed the desire to attack the United States, and thus earn their attention. Or at least those currently leading those nations haven't expressed those desires. The United States lives in a world where they are the only major super power capable of projecting that power world wide. Thus they are damned if you do and damned if you don't. You know how the saying goes, you can please some of the people some of the time but never all of the people all of the time? That's the United States right now. They can either sit there and not intervene, like they have with Rawanda and be condemed for not intervening, or they can go into such places at their own expense, like Bosnia, and still get critisized.

As for the US testing chemicals on their own people, well, there were alot of stupid decisions made back then, I wouldn't be surprised. It's reprehensible and not defensible. But I will say this, they weren't doing it to keep the population living in fear of the government, and had the population known about it some serious shit would have hit the fan.

As far as giving Sadaam his weapons, well, at the time he was an ally. At that time it was a very different situation, where controlling the oil supply in the mid east meant survival of your way of life. The freedoms we all enjoy right now weren't purchased by you. They were bought by the people who fought the cold war. Sadly now we must clean up the mess they made of that area.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Error
Al Quida, then if you find more info leading to others who have helped attack you, say, IRAQ, then you move in and finish them off. Step by step.

---

I dont see how saddam is related al qaida...?

I just wish Bush and the rest of the Goverenment would quit blowing smoke up my ass and be honest. Id be a-ok with him if he just said "Iraq is a bad bad place, we are going to get them. They will never fuck up world oil prices and drive all industerlized nations into the toilet as long as im here."

That's all I want, a little bit of honesty, not him trying to grab at air to connect everything thats happend together for the sake of making the history books read better.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by IronPlant
I just wish Bush and the rest of the Goverenment would quit blowing smoke up my ass and be honest. Id be a-ok with him if he just said "Iraq is a bad bad place, we are going to get them. They will never fuck up world oil prices and drive all industerlized nations into the toilet as long as im here."

That's all I want, a little bit of honesty, not him trying to grab at air to connect everything thats happend together for the sake of making the history books read better.

---

secrets and lies, power and economic control is what the game is all about with the government. They'll tell you what they "think" you need to know and keep all the important info locked behind secret intellegence. What comes down to personal affairs doesn't concern our interest, even if it is our concern...

The government was never one for the people and that'll never change unless we have a revolution which I couldn't doubt would happen in the next 20-40 years should they keep doing things the way they are now.

"Could someone explain the situation in Iraq more clearly to me"

As clearly and logically as possible, I will explain.


President Bush, the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Senate have deemed Iraq to be a threat to world peace and national security. Why?

You should have watched the President's speech on the 7th but you didn't, so I will explain. Iraq has chemical and biological weapons. This breaks a UN resolution that Iraq agreed to. In a sense, this is breaking an international law. Iraq's regime has been deemed unfit to have these weapons according to the UN because the regime is dangerous. Iraq has used these weapons against not only Iran but it's own people, just because their beliefs are different.

Iraq is developing nuclear weapons. It has been revealed that at the time of the Gulf War, Iraq was 3-6 months away from developing a nuclear weapon. The war set them back but they haven't stopped. The problem with Iraq having a nuclear weapon is that it's regime is not safe; not trustable. I don't care if a country has nuclear weapons and in fact support them in developing them so long as it is not for in intention of harming other nations but with the intention of self defense (be it retaliation or deterrence). Iraq has attacked Kuwait, Iran, the Kurds, Saudi Arabia, Israel and others with ballistic missles or chemical weapons. What makes you think that they will refrain from using nukes?

Developing nuclear technology is also against the UN resolutions that Iraq agreed to.

Iraq kicked out inspectors. But the goal is not just inspectors. The goal is imspectors any time, anywhere. Iraq said that if inspectors went in that they could not check the presidential palaces; palaces which encompass 120 square miles with their properties.

Unfettered inspections were also a UN resolution that Iraq agreed to.

Iraq has broken one promise and resolution after another. The UN has proven to be utterly useless. Something needs to be done. China, North Korea and Iran are dangerous countries with nuclear arsenals but these countries are not routinely making threats, attacking their civilians or attacking neighbors (not counting the Korean War and the opression of Iran or China's people).

Iraq's regime is dangerous and must be gotten rid of. It supports terrorism. It is building weapons of mass destruction and weapons of chemical/biological matter for the sole intention of attack (Saddam's nuclear scientists are referred to as his Nuclear Holy Warriors). Iraq needs freedom. It's people are opressed and starving. Our sanctions have nothing to do with that; Iraq has the oil for food program which would work if Saddam wasn't stealing the money and using it for weapons.

This is why we're going in. We've got friends who need to be protected and we have a duty to protect ourselves, thus we must do it.

Just my 2 cents.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jimmy Carter
"

You should have watched the President's speech on the 7th but you didn't, so I will explain. Iraq has chemical and biological weapons. This breaks a UN resolution that Iraq agreed to. In a sense, this is breaking an international law. Iraq's regime has been deemed unfit to have these weapons according to the UN because the regime is dangerous. Iraq has used these weapons against not only Iran but it's own people, just because their beliefs are different.

---

Should'nt other countries that break international law be attacked?

Depends on how bad of a law they break; just like citizens breaking US laws. Nobody gets put to death for a speeding violation.

See? THAT's why he won the peace prize.... :P

... thank you, my Canadian friend!