Political thread..

Discussion in 'Green Room' started by Leo154, Jan 11, 2003.

  1. Leo154

    Leo154 Guest

    Is there anyone on this forum interested?

    The Iraqi Crisis:-

    Why does the US and UK still want to attack? The inspectors say that there are no weapons in Iraq... How can Washington all of a sudden be so "sure" that Iraq has WOMD? Why weren't they sure a couple of months earlier. I think that this is blatent propoganda just so that the US can attack in the winter months.

    What are the aims of the war? To get rid of Saddam? Oil? Destabalise the Middle East? If it is the get rid of Saddam, why is it at the expenses of the lives of the Iraqi people?

    Does anyone realise that there is still conflict between Plastine and Israel? This new intent for US to attack Iraq has been a successful distraction. What Israel is doing is even worse then the first time in 2002 when the trapped Arafat in his compound.

    ?
     
  2. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    ok firstly this is likely to become a flame thread therefore I would like to ask that anyone posting in this thread please refrain from overtly inflamatory statements...

    opinions are valid...

    now for my response... european nations such as the uk and france and countries like the united states know exactly how much WOMD stock Iraq has because THEY provided it in the first place...

    the iran-iraq war was the time most of these products came into iraq...

    aims of the war would be, in the words of the bush administration, to provide the iraqi people with a less oppresive leader (in their words) and a way to remove sanctions that are STILL in place many years after the war ended... saddam naturally will likely be terminated (I love that word :) watchin t-2 as I speak) and naturally the 'new' leadership will probably be someone allied to the us/europe in some way or other so political agenda naturally fulfilled...

    israel and palestine ar eprobably going to be in a state of flux for a while because everyone is basically trying to do something about the second editi9on of the gulf war...

    80,000 us troops there is a fair amount of man power... and any attacks on iraq are going to be terrible for the us economy... it costs a lot to fund a war especially with a budget deficit.. but no one claims that bush is a clever business minded person... :)

    arafat has lost support amongst his own people... he is a figure head now.. there are lots of smaller factions fighting their own personal wars with israel... its not the same situation as a few years ago when clinton was there...

    concerning your statement about the lives of the iraqi civilians... that is not really a concern of the international community apparently... if it was then the embargo's and sanctions placed on iraq would have been lifted a long time ago...

    far more people have died from starvation and diseases related to the sanctions/embargos than saddam could ever kill in his regime so far...
     
  3. Leo154

    Leo154 Guest

    okay so you said that the EU and US know about the weapons of mass destruction because they provided it? Why didn't they say that earlier. Why did France provide such big opposition to the war? What was the purpose of the UN inspectors, if they already know...

    If what you're saying is right, then this was just a little act (proganda) to delay the war to the winter... It 3 C in Baghdad right now.. (CNN)

    Now, almost everyone I stumble over in such conversations seems to be against the Bush Adm... so does that mean that he's not popular? He'll be out next elections? Thats democracy after all right?

    Wow, you've just admitted that they didn't really care about the lives of the Iraqis... thanx..?!
     
  4. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    well heres' the thing...

    iraq is saying it does not have WMD or has had all of it destroyed or has disposed of it...

    the us and uk are saying no... they have it hidden coz they can't account for whats not there...

    france... unlike some other members of the security council does actually think about its actions before it acts... and it is countries like russia/france and china that have counterbalanced the us/uk ideaology of war first v/s iraq...

    they are trying to be more prudent and trying to get more information...

    ammasing forces by the thousands on the outskirts of a nation in order to bully it is NOT supported by the un charter...

    bush will probably get re-elected... his administration leaked documents about his next campaigns platform... and it is based almost entirely on the war and terrorism and how he was such a great leader during 9/11 in 2k1...

    now of course the party claims that those are just SOME of the platforms that bush is THINKING about running on...

    no doubt a war will help him a lot more than it helped his dad... bush jr has no domestic agenda of which to speak... his economic advisors have been feeding hot air to the media since early last year about economic recovery and stimulus packages and what not...

    he is popular though because the only people who bother to vote right now seem not care about domestic agenda and what not and like the idea of a democratically elected president and his country unilaterally brought down...

    btw the views I am expressing are MY OWN.. they do not represent the views of the other people in america :)
     
  5. Leo154

    Leo154 Guest

    I never said that it was based on YOUR opinion... Its just that alot of people (americans) I seem to talk to dont like bush... and he's getting re-elected.. great!
     
  6. Dj Empy

    Dj Empy Guest

    can i just gatecrash and say


    Republic of England :) United to fight against Europe :)


    Anti Euro party all the way


    ok

    iraqi crisis is a good idea to be honest i think we shud go into war simple reason because we need to stop the east from the attacks which we get all the time its just qwrong we shudnt have to do all this we shud just live in peace




    At Peace
     
  7. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    :)

    basically a lot of the problems with territory are the by-results of british occupation... israel/palestine... india/pakistan... the 2 major ones...

    if you say go to war without understanding the consequences of the war... you are obviously not understanding the fundamentals of war...

    frankly speaking the only problems england has REALLY had recently were IRA related and with other separatists...and you have had talks with them and it is alot better than it was a little while ago...

    efectively british foreign policy may not be the best :)
     
  8. Leo154

    Leo154 Guest

    Well. well, well... England.. the start of all the problems...

    You think we should just go into war to stop the attacks? Well the whole reason there are attacks are because of western opression. So more opression will stop attacks.. yes I see your logic...
     
  9. Dj Empy

    Dj Empy Guest

    Ok, You guys i agree with you, Problems started after British Rule but that was the past and now theyre fighting against america


    They wouldnt give us any problems whatsoever if we didnt get involved in what america is doing soo yes at the end of the day it all needs to stop.




    At Peace
     
  10. gonaads

    gonaads Beware the G-Man Political User Folding Team

    O.K. in a nut shell... there is no more *Cold War*, no more *Cut and Dry* enemy. So they need something to keep the Military Machine going. Imaging if because there is no clear cut enemy anymore like when Russia was the enemy and then when the *Cold War* ensued that the Military had no more funding and could not continue to create weapons and things.

    Saddam was put into power by the U.S. just like Noriega in Panama... CIA??? (BUSH) Hmmmmmm... and now Saddam just like Noriega is not what the U.S. wants anymore. So now it's "He/They are the enemy"... plus all that oil, and the stratigic location of Irag... well you do the math.

    Look at Bin Laden and the Taliban, the U.S. backed them when they were fighting the Russians in Afganistan... OOPS!
     
  11. gonaads

    gonaads Beware the G-Man Political User Folding Team

    Re-elected... Not in this lifetime!!!
     
  12. Leo154

    Leo154 Guest

    we can only hope so...

    and who know who might be next... he maybe worst... i hope you get a female president for once... they can make nasty p0rn movies about her!! :D