War on Iraq

Originally posted by jonifen
i hope im wrong by thinking/saying this...

but I think the war over saddam is over waaaay too quick, and I cant help but think that he's gone off to lick his wounds and plan a huge attack of revenge. I could be wrong (I hope I'm wrong)... but it seems a little strange that a guy who didnt seem to care that the US and UK were against him could let the war end so soon.

I wonder how many more wars we're going to have over in Iraq?? I hope this is the last one tho tbh.

he never had the firepower to compete... which is one of the primary reasons he was attacked... the people in the know didn't expect ANY resistance... hence the SHOCK and AWE when it took them as long as it did to roll over the iraqi militia...

saddam didnt have a chance to win... he knew it.. as bad a military planner as he is...
 
Originally posted by Nick M
I didn't know cats were interested in politics.

Cat. :p

Normally they're not but I've recently promoted him to information minister...

Mubbers
 
Originally posted by Sazar

saddam didnt have a chance to win... he knew it.. as bad a military planner as he is...

the idiot fired all professional generals after the war with Iran and replcaed them with his friends..the idiot he thought the army is like a company to run...the new iraqi army has no expreince at all.war strategies must be TOP SECRET but the idiot he came up on tv saying we will do this and that.They could handle all the bombs for 6 months but the idiot he sent all his army to attack at the airport and outside Baghdad!He once sat on his big chair with a cuban cigarette in his mouth to motivate his soldiers by asking them about their names...what an idiot.
 
Originally posted by Octopus
the idiot fired all professional generals after the war with Iran and replcaed them with his friends..the idiot he thought the army is like a company to run...the new iraqi army has no expreince at all.war strategies must be TOP SECRET but the idiot he came up on tv saying we will do this and that.They could handle all the bombs for 6 months but the idiot he sent all his army to attack at the airport and outside Baghdad!He once sat on his big chair with a cuban cigarette in his mouth to motivate his soldiers by asking them about their names...what an idiot.

thats why I said.. as bad a military planner as he is...

I know his track record :)

of pulling top generals from the ranks for doing things against his wishes... no matter how rididculous his orders might have been..
 
Originally posted by Sazar
/me thinks geffy has been watching a lot of Star Trek lately...
Star trek?? no, I have been watching 24, Die Hard 1 and 2 (3 is on tonight :p), and I have been reading Cryptonomicon. Dont ask where the philosophical stuff had come from, I might have been drinking.
 
Yes this is an old ploy, but I doubt that this is the case here. More likely that a small nuclear device has been left in place (or places). That will detonate in about three weeks time, just as it looks like all is ok. This is not only the worst scenario but also the cheapest and easiest but does not generate the most fear when compared to biological warfare in the eyes of the western world.

Lets hope not!!!
 
Did anyone see the Gulf War II Monopoly board the Brits were playing with out there??


It had Saddam Intnl Airport, Basra Water Works.. all those things on it!!

Excellente'

Mubbers
 
saddam didnt have a chance to win... he knew it.. as bad a military planner as he is...

They thought as did most of the naysayers in the rest of the world that we would cut and run as soon as we suffered a few casualties.Just as we did in Mogadishu(under a diff administration).Remember black hawk down?The pres refused to send the aid that our marines needed!Instead he pulled us out and made all the (arab)world to see that americans are weak and feminised and cowards.
All the handwringers on the left thought another Iraq war would be WW3 or another Vietnam or we would lose thousands of our military or whatever sort of doom and gloom gobbaly goop they could think of. All of the arab world learned from Mogadishu that americans didn't have the stomach for(war) any casualties.The arab world learned from this Iraq war to respect and/or fear america. Which suits me either way.Noticed that Syria is startin to sing a diff tune.
All of the arab world that supported us is on SOLID ground.All of the arab world that has tried to undermine or obstruct us is not.
Operation Iraqi freedom is a resounding success!(except for the doom and gloomers,of course!)FREEDOM FREEDOM FREEDOM !!!
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Originally posted by kitct
They thought as did most of the naysayers in the rest of the world that we would cut and run as soon as we suffered a few casualties.Just as we did in Mogadishu(under a diff administration).Remember black hawk down?The pres refused to send the aid that our marines needed!Instead he pulled us out and made all the (arab)world to see that americans are weak and feminised and cowards.
All the handwringers on the left thought another Iraq war would be WW3 or another Vietnam or we would lose thousands of our military or whatever sort of doom and gloom gobbaly goop they could think of. All of the arab world learned from Mogadishu that americans didn't have the stomach for(war) any casualties.The arab world learned from this Iraq war to respect and/or fear america. Which suits me either way.Noticed that Syria is startin to sing a diff tune.
All of the arab world that supported us is on SOLID ground.All of the arab world that has tried to undermine or obstruct us is not.
Operation Iraqi freedom is a resounding success!(except for the doom and gloomers,of course!)FREEDOM FREEDOM FREEDOM !!!
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

somalia was a quite different scenario...

we went in there as peacekeepers under the auspices of the UN... with an added agenda of overthrowing farah aided (sp?)...

in a peacekeeping op.. no room for casualties... and seeing the bodies dragged around town was not quite what we needed either...

that was not a war... and the withdrawl was not a defeat... it was for safety reasons...

your views on the turn of events are very interesting however..

:)

though I have yet to hear any of my middle-eastern friends call americans 'feminized' :)
 
Originally posted by Sazar
though I have yet to hear any of my middle-eastern friends call americans 'feminized' :)
oh I have... more then once.
Just listen to one "lecture" by the Iraqi MSI.
(IIM, MSI, MSS, whatever... Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf)
 
Originally posted by Benny
oh I have... more then once.
Just listen to one "lecture" by the Iraqi MSI.
(IIM, MSI, MSS, whatever... Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf)

yah... but I never knew him. hence he is no friend of mine :D
 
September 11, 2001 - April 9, 2003
From the April 28, 2003 issue: The era of American weakness and doubt in response to terrorism is over.
by William Kristol
04/28/2003, Volume 008, Issue 32

AMERICA WAS ATTACKED a little over a year and a half ago. This assault was the product of two decades of American weakness in the face of terror and three decades of American fecklessness in the Middle East. From the barely-responded-to bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983 to the host of subsequent, little-noticed or quickly forgotten attacks in the later 1980s and in the 1990s, we came to be seen as a "weak horse." That characterization was Osama bin Laden's, and he made it with reason.

Similarly, from the oil embargo of 1973 through the destruction of a free and democratic Lebanon in the mid-1970s by the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Syrians, to the Khomeini revolution in Iran, the accelerated Saudi export of violent Wahhabi Islam to America and the world, and Saddam Hussein's brutalities in the 1980s and 1990s, the United States rolled with the punches. Saddam, to cite an egregious example, was allowed to stay in power after being routed in the Gulf War, then held accountable only on rare occasions for continually violating the ceasefire he signed. Along the way, the United States decided its proper response to Middle East tyranny and brutality should be not to punish our enemies and stand up for our principles, but rather to focus on a "peace process" between democratic Israel and the master-terrorist Yasser Arafat.

But that era--in which the American stance was one of doubt, weakness, and retreat, in which we failed to affirm our most cherished principles or even stand up for ourselves--came to an end on September 11, 2001. The United States committed itself to defeating terror around the world. We committed ourselves to reshaping the Middle East, so the region would no longer be a hotbed of terrorism, extremism, anti-Americanism, and weapons of mass destruction. The first two battles of this new era are now over. The battles of Afghanistan and Iraq have been won decisively and honorably. But these are only two battles. We are only at the end of the beginning in the war on terror and terrorist states.

The Taliban regime that provided safe haven and support for al Qaeda has been removed, and up to two million Afghan refugees have gone home. One of the two dangerous rogue regimes that have dominated the Persian Gulf--the political heart of the volatile and crucial Middle East--has been overthrown. Some 50 million Muslims, liberated from brutal governments, now have a chance to live decent and normal lives. The war on terror, meanwhile, has gone extraordinarily well. Though the threat of another serious terrorist strike on America has not vanished, there has been none since the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon on September 11. Law enforcement authorities have uprooted al Qaeda sleeper cells at home, and friendly governments have cracked down on anti-American terrorists abroad.

We are a strong nation. But a successful response to the challenges that culminated in September 11 was by no means inevitable. Let's be honest, and let's even run the risk of being denounced for partisanship: If Bill Clinton had still been president on September 11, and were still president now, the Taliban might be gone, but Saddam would still be in power, and we would still be considering P.C.-acceptable ways to fight the war on terror at home and U.N.-acceptable ways to do so abroad.

Leadership matters. President Bush, above all, but also Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and Attorney General John Ashcroft, among others, have risen to the challenge of September 11. The American military has risen to the challenge with two brilliant and innovative campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. The American people, too, have risen to the challenge. Many battles remain to be fought, both military and political, many tests of America's resolve. But the war on terror and terrorist states--the defining challenge of this moment--is well-begun.

--William Kristol

Excellent article! Could not have said it better myself!
 
Bush gave William Kristol head? :rolleyes:
i'm off to find an article about Saddam Husein saving a drowning kid or something, fight fire with fire :p
 
Originally posted by kitct
The defense of monsters is a terrible thing to waste! ;)
Not defending anyone, just cant stand demagogy ;)
I'll be sure to send Mr William Kristol a touching photograph of starving Iraqi children... something he can add to his next article, might even photo edit a hugging GWB into that photograph.
make him feel good about himself.
 
Originally posted by Benny
Not defending anyone, just cant stand demagogy ;)
I'll be sure to send Mr William Kristol a touching photograph of starving Iraqi children... something he can add to his next article, might even photo edit a hugging GWB into that photograph.
make him feel good about himself.

You got me there! Saddam never did make any false claims or promises in order to gain power.He just outright killed anyone who disagreed w/him.And he never did champion the cause of the common people.Your right,Saddam doesn't fit the profile of a demogogue.

While we are sending pics,how about all of the political prisoners released from prisons and torture chambers.And don't forget the children released from the prisons too.And the mountains of food and medicine and wealth stored up for Saddam and his buddies while the common folk who were not tortured or killed were starvin and w/o medicine and w/o choices(freedom).We can disagree on anything we want to w/o fear of repercussions(prison and/or torture).The Iraqi people haven't had this luxury for at least 30 years.Its strange to me that people who enjoy freedom,mock it.I guess hatred for one man,encouraged by the media can overcome just about anything.Hatred is certainly a powerful thing. :)
 
william kristol does a fabulous job of leaving out many facts and only choosing to dwell on aspects of other facts that further his dialogue... :)

btw... what the heck happened to the whole 'attack iraq for our own security' argument ? wmd's... remember them... freedom of the people is not as important.. if it was.. than saddam would not have been supported during the iran/iraq war...

kristol.. I am sorry to say.. disappoints in his total lack of balance in his writing...

really unfortunate...
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest profile posts

Also Hi EP and people. I found this place again while looking through a oooollllllldddd backup. I have filled over 10TB and was looking at my collection of antiques. Any bids on the 500Mhz Win 95 fix?
Any of the SP crew still out there?
Xie wrote on Electronic Punk's profile.
Impressed you have kept this alive this long EP! So many sites have come and gone. :(

Just did some crude math and I apparently joined almost 18yrs ago, how is that possible???
hello peeps... is been some time since i last came here.
Electronic Punk wrote on Sazar's profile.
Rest in peace my friend, been trying to find you and finally did in the worst way imaginable.

Forum statistics

Threads
62,015
Messages
673,496
Members
5,625
Latest member
vinit
Back