ShiningIce
3rd Level Green Feather
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
- Messages
- 4,704
- Points
- 36
Saddam cant kill all of Europe. He can barely manage his own country.
-
If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread -
Check out Tickling.com - the most innovative tickling site of the year. -
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
Anti-War
- Thread starter jhop220
- Start date
War is not the answer
i like how people have voiced their opinions and i agree that saddam should be out of Iraq but i do not agree on doing this without world support. We may not need to have permission but it still is better than doing this without permission. We need to continue inspection in Iraq and start focusing on a growing nuclear threat such as North Korea. Bush doesn't see that Korea is more unstable right now than Iraq. We have world support against North Korea and we need to foresee its growing threat befopre they do something catastrophic.
i like how people have voiced their opinions and i agree that saddam should be out of Iraq but i do not agree on doing this without world support. We may not need to have permission but it still is better than doing this without permission. We need to continue inspection in Iraq and start focusing on a growing nuclear threat such as North Korea. Bush doesn't see that Korea is more unstable right now than Iraq. We have world support against North Korea and we need to foresee its growing threat befopre they do something catastrophic.
Until now, it seemed hard to believe that the U. S. took so long to confront Hitler (and only after our Navy was attacked by Japan).
Germany was allowed to re-arm after WWI because no country wanted another war, even though the opponent was weak during their early defiance. Did we learn anything from this? Not really.
Destroy the sadistic monster Saddam while the opportunity is best, not when he has time to form an alliance with al-Qaeda or experiment with WMD.
The people who decry war are no better than Neville Chamberlain (the genius Prime Minister of Great Britain who thought he could appease Hitler for those keeping score).
I wonder how many victims of Saddam's torture chambers and rape rooms (of those who lived) would march shoulder-to-shoulder with the anti-war protesters?
How can we expect France to help us get Saddam out of Iraq when they didn't help us get Germany out of France? - Leno
Germany was allowed to re-arm after WWI because no country wanted another war, even though the opponent was weak during their early defiance. Did we learn anything from this? Not really.
Destroy the sadistic monster Saddam while the opportunity is best, not when he has time to form an alliance with al-Qaeda or experiment with WMD.
The people who decry war are no better than Neville Chamberlain (the genius Prime Minister of Great Britain who thought he could appease Hitler for those keeping score).
I wonder how many victims of Saddam's torture chambers and rape rooms (of those who lived) would march shoulder-to-shoulder with the anti-war protesters?
How can we expect France to help us get Saddam out of Iraq when they didn't help us get Germany out of France? - Leno
Texas_Tickle
4th Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 2,950
- Points
- 38
redway10 said:
Well if people think Saddam is not so bad, why not go over there, for 6 months, and live with the locals?
Then come back and see if you still support "good ol' uncle Saddam"
TummyDragon
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2001
- Messages
- 394
- Points
- 0
Wait to die?
At this point? you are damned straight we take him out "preemptively". We live in a different world now. We live in a world where any asshole with the right backing can take out hundreds of thousands of people. If we wait, many of OUR people could be sacrificed. Um, simply to prove we are not the evil aggressors?
Anything, anyone, anywhere who is a viable threat to our safety should be annihilated "preemptively" as a matter of self defense. Let them call us evil, that's fine. Let them say were are "Satan", that's fine to. Let them hate us, I can deal with that too. Let them say they are going to harm anyone? Blow them straight to Allah's lap.
At this point? you are damned straight we take him out "preemptively". We live in a different world now. We live in a world where any asshole with the right backing can take out hundreds of thousands of people. If we wait, many of OUR people could be sacrificed. Um, simply to prove we are not the evil aggressors?
Anything, anyone, anywhere who is a viable threat to our safety should be annihilated "preemptively" as a matter of self defense. Let them call us evil, that's fine. Let them say were are "Satan", that's fine to. Let them hate us, I can deal with that too. Let them say they are going to harm anyone? Blow them straight to Allah's lap.
SteveyB said:
A lot of the public motivation for this war comes from 9/11. After that we were told "Al-Qaeda did it!" and after that we were told "Saddham supports Al-Qaeda" ( I spell it differently nearly every time I write it! 
)
As you might expect of me, I've got quite a lot of information about certain events behind 9/11. I don't have them together in such a way as I could present them coherantly though. However, given a few days to assimilate it all, I will. I'm sure a lot of it will be very unpopular because it will fly in the face of what we've all been assured is true, and will sound distinctly unpatriotic to some. If you've read some of my political posts before, then you'll know what to expect. If you believe it's unpatriotic to question what we're told by our politicians and news networks, then don't read it and you won't get an ulcer.
)As you might expect of me, I've got quite a lot of information about certain events behind 9/11. I don't have them together in such a way as I could present them coherantly though. However, given a few days to assimilate it all, I will. I'm sure a lot of it will be very unpopular because it will fly in the face of what we've all been assured is true, and will sound distinctly unpatriotic to some. If you've read some of my political posts before, then you'll know what to expect. If you believe it's unpatriotic to question what we're told by our politicians and news networks, then don't read it and you won't get an ulcer.
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
jim you disappoint me
we have only disagreed twice i believe.
you needn't feel unpatriotic for disagreeing with president bush, after all, you're not an american!
but your last post accusing president bush of being a mental case, and a loose cannon, was over the top. such insults can only be construde as an attempt to provoke a fight. i would have thought it beneth you.
i may skip your post accusing my national leaders of lying, i may read it, only time will tell. but for your information, i too have behind the scene info. from friends who are still active duty. according to them the only thing pres. bush is guilty of is not telling the whole awfull truth to avoid panic!
so go ahead, say what ever you'd like, some will buy your swill, others will shrug, and wonder what bee got into your bonnet?
steve
we have only disagreed twice i believe.
you needn't feel unpatriotic for disagreeing with president bush, after all, you're not an american!
but your last post accusing president bush of being a mental case, and a loose cannon, was over the top. such insults can only be construde as an attempt to provoke a fight. i would have thought it beneth you.
i may skip your post accusing my national leaders of lying, i may read it, only time will tell. but for your information, i too have behind the scene info. from friends who are still active duty. according to them the only thing pres. bush is guilty of is not telling the whole awfull truth to avoid panic!
so go ahead, say what ever you'd like, some will buy your swill, others will shrug, and wonder what bee got into your bonnet?
steve
Re: jim you disappoint me
Without wishing to besmirch (William Regal eat yer heart out!) your friends Steve, if they're on active service then most of their information will be coloured. That doesn't mean I don't respect their honesty or forthrightedness, just that their views won't present the whole picture. If you'd like to share any of that ifo with me (I realise you might find that compromising to OPSEC) then feel free to e-mail me. I am a very open minded individual and weigh everything on it's merits. I don't discount anything out of hand. I always look for the background first.
True, but as a Brit I'm a member of the 51st state. Besides which, the US and the UK will be tied together politically and culturally for much longer than I'll live. Saying anything against an american politician is usually critiscising one of my own, because they take such similar lines.areenactor said:
Okay, I'll admit that there wa smore than a touch of flippancy and facsetiousness in my remarks. To be 100% accurate, I would'nt say he was a mental case; but I do think he is unbalanced and dangerously right-wing. If there'd been no checks on him, he would have de-populated Texas on his own.areenactor said:
Without wishing to besmirch (William Regal eat yer heart out!) your friends Steve, if they're on active service then most of their information will be coloured. That doesn't mean I don't respect their honesty or forthrightedness, just that their views won't present the whole picture. If you'd like to share any of that ifo with me (I realise you might find that compromising to OPSEC) then feel free to e-mail me. I am a very open minded individual and weigh everything on it's merits. I don't discount anything out of hand. I always look for the background first.
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
Re: Re: jim you disappoint me
i'm not 100% sure what i'll do jim. i do fine it facinationg though that you don't like my closed mindedness, but you portray my service buddies info as "coloured", and "not the whole picture". do you not see the hypocracy here?
could you not be operating on an anti-war position, and there for not willing to recognise the truth?
a couple of points we know; the u.s. sold sadam chemical weapons (i know what kind of fools were we?!?!) he has only accounted for less than half of what we sold him, let alone what we know he made.
the former head of his neuclear weapons program who defected to the u.s. has stated he (sadam) already has the materials to make 5 nukes!
we (u.s. military/intel.) has identified known al-qida members, and terrorist training facilities inside iraq.
we in the u.s. have already had a building fall on us, what else do you anti-war folks need to convince you?
steve
BigJim said:
i'm not 100% sure what i'll do jim. i do fine it facinationg though that you don't like my closed mindedness, but you portray my service buddies info as "coloured", and "not the whole picture". do you not see the hypocracy here?
could you not be operating on an anti-war position, and there for not willing to recognise the truth?
a couple of points we know; the u.s. sold sadam chemical weapons (i know what kind of fools were we?!?!) he has only accounted for less than half of what we sold him, let alone what we know he made.
the former head of his neuclear weapons program who defected to the u.s. has stated he (sadam) already has the materials to make 5 nukes!
we (u.s. military/intel.) has identified known al-qida members, and terrorist training facilities inside iraq.
we in the u.s. have already had a building fall on us, what else do you anti-war folks need to convince you?
steve
Re: Re: Re: jim you disappoint me
Ah, I don't find them coloured. It's the information they're in the line of that is. Just because someone is in the services doesn't mean I think they're close-minded Steve. If you were a services chief, you'd hardly put information in the way intel guys that would make them question their motives, would you? Hell, I work for the MOD myself, (our equivalent of the Department of Defence, but the M stands for Ministry) but try to keep my head up and look for other corroberation to things.
As for being anti-war I have to say I'm not, per se'. War is not something I stand against no matter what the circumstances. On occasion it's been inevitable. The only thing I'm always aganist is governments and media agencies deliberatley "coulouring" the information they give us, to produce enough public feeling in the direction they want to pull us. With 9/11 and it's Al-Qaeda assosciations, there is a shit-load of information that us poor, Joe-public, suckers havn't been told. If when I post what I've learned and you decide it's illogical and only worthy of being ignored, that's fine mate. It ain't my business to try to convince you of something against your will, is it? Despite my sometimes pseudo-evangelical bearing, that would go against everything I believe in. All I will ask is that you at least give it a glance. I am pretty sure that it will sound un-patriotic to you, because it certainly does accuse our politicians of lying to us; but you never know. Some part of it might ring a bell with you. If it doesn't Steve, that's entirely your right.
I'm sorry if I came across as over-bearing Steve. I know that I can let enthusiasm to communicate get the better of me sometimes. I hope it doesn't stop us debating things that are less controversial and more pleasant than politics.
areenactor said:
Ah, I don't find them coloured. It's the information they're in the line of that is. Just because someone is in the services doesn't mean I think they're close-minded Steve. If you were a services chief, you'd hardly put information in the way intel guys that would make them question their motives, would you? Hell, I work for the MOD myself, (our equivalent of the Department of Defence, but the M stands for Ministry) but try to keep my head up and look for other corroberation to things.
As for being anti-war I have to say I'm not, per se'. War is not something I stand against no matter what the circumstances. On occasion it's been inevitable. The only thing I'm always aganist is governments and media agencies deliberatley "coulouring" the information they give us, to produce enough public feeling in the direction they want to pull us. With 9/11 and it's Al-Qaeda assosciations, there is a shit-load of information that us poor, Joe-public, suckers havn't been told. If when I post what I've learned and you decide it's illogical and only worthy of being ignored, that's fine mate. It ain't my business to try to convince you of something against your will, is it? Despite my sometimes pseudo-evangelical bearing, that would go against everything I believe in. All I will ask is that you at least give it a glance. I am pretty sure that it will sound un-patriotic to you, because it certainly does accuse our politicians of lying to us; but you never know. Some part of it might ring a bell with you. If it doesn't Steve, that's entirely your right.
I'm sorry if I came across as over-bearing Steve. I know that I can let enthusiasm to communicate get the better of me sometimes. I hope it doesn't stop us debating things that are less controversial and more pleasant than politics.
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
hey big jim...
i'm the last one that can throw stones over being passionate about a topic, and in communicating.
i hope we'll always be friends.
steve
i'm the last one that can throw stones over being passionate about a topic, and in communicating.
i hope we'll always be friends.
steve
I support you Jim
Listen I don't want to offend any true Bush fans out there. Please don't take my words offensively. Diplomacy only failed because of the administarations lack of trying. To me by dropping the vote and giving the ultimatum we just gave up and said to hell with it we'll kill em all. I want to stress that We are not a country to attack a country for no apparent reason without suffient evidence. I believe Bush is a war head. There I said it don't kill me. Dipolmacy can work I know it could if we just listen and come up with a compromise and not its our way or the highway attitude. Look at world support in the past year. Britians taste for America dropped to near 40%. While France went from 60% to 38%. Russia is below 10%. this is from 2002 to now. We need support not the world against us. Failure to allow dipolomacy is basicly a failure to even consider what the world thinks or how anything could be compromised
Listen I don't want to offend any true Bush fans out there. Please don't take my words offensively. Diplomacy only failed because of the administarations lack of trying. To me by dropping the vote and giving the ultimatum we just gave up and said to hell with it we'll kill em all. I want to stress that We are not a country to attack a country for no apparent reason without suffient evidence. I believe Bush is a war head. There I said it don't kill me. Dipolmacy can work I know it could if we just listen and come up with a compromise and not its our way or the highway attitude. Look at world support in the past year. Britians taste for America dropped to near 40%. While France went from 60% to 38%. Russia is below 10%. this is from 2002 to now. We need support not the world against us. Failure to allow dipolomacy is basicly a failure to even consider what the world thinks or how anything could be compromised
ShiningIce
3rd Level Green Feather
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2002
- Messages
- 4,704
- Points
- 36
No shit Lol . Hes also a maniac.
2 wars and 20 years...
2 wars and 20 years of diplomacy haven't budged Saddam one inch from his throne.
Why in the world would he be concerned about a third war or more pointless diplomacy?
Just because President Bush is too conservative and way too religious does not make Saddam any less of a nightmare to the Iraqi people.
With all of the comparisons between George Bush's evil and Saddam Hussein's evil by the anti-war zealots, it's a wonder that so many of them would find living under George Bush's dictatorship quite tolerable, but are very happy that they are not a citizen of Iraq under Saddam's rule.
Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford were let off the hook for their appeasement efforts for Hitler, I suppose the same will be true for Chirac and company this time. That's twice for France, but the first time at least they did it with a gun at their head (a little too willingly, I think).
When the torture chambers, rape rooms, chemical and biological weapons, and terrified victims of Saddam are exposed to the world, what will the appeasers say then? Diplomacy would have worked? After 20 years and 2 wars?
While America has a sad record of supporting dictators (of this we should be ashamed), we also have the best record in fighting and removing them of any country in the last 100 years, especially if you include the fall of the Soviet Union (of this we should be proud).
Who would have thought the an ULTRA right-wing dictator like Saddam Hussein would have the liberal wing of the developed world trying so desperately to save him? Of this they should be ashamed.
2 wars and 20 years of diplomacy haven't budged Saddam one inch from his throne.
Why in the world would he be concerned about a third war or more pointless diplomacy?
Just because President Bush is too conservative and way too religious does not make Saddam any less of a nightmare to the Iraqi people.
With all of the comparisons between George Bush's evil and Saddam Hussein's evil by the anti-war zealots, it's a wonder that so many of them would find living under George Bush's dictatorship quite tolerable, but are very happy that they are not a citizen of Iraq under Saddam's rule.
Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford were let off the hook for their appeasement efforts for Hitler, I suppose the same will be true for Chirac and company this time. That's twice for France, but the first time at least they did it with a gun at their head (a little too willingly, I think).
When the torture chambers, rape rooms, chemical and biological weapons, and terrified victims of Saddam are exposed to the world, what will the appeasers say then? Diplomacy would have worked? After 20 years and 2 wars?
While America has a sad record of supporting dictators (of this we should be ashamed), we also have the best record in fighting and removing them of any country in the last 100 years, especially if you include the fall of the Soviet Union (of this we should be proud).
Who would have thought the an ULTRA right-wing dictator like Saddam Hussein would have the liberal wing of the developed world trying so desperately to save him? Of this they should be ashamed.
Re: 2 wars and 20 years...
Saddam Hussein is an arsehole, make no mistake. This war is going to last a lot less time than he hopes. The people of Iraq are as sick of the bastard as we are, despite what Iraq's equivalent of Claptrap No News might say. Once the army sees the full amount of shit heading their way, they will come in in droves to surrendur and swap sides. If the allies had supported the Kurdish revolt in 1991 instead of sitting on their collective arseholes, then something similar would have happened then. In the end it won't be our overwhelming technological advantage that will break the tached wanker. It'll be his own people not being wiling to fight for him.
It's just horus to wait before it begins now. I'm expecting a lot of bloody overtime!
redway10 said:
Saddam Hussein is an arsehole, make no mistake. This war is going to last a lot less time than he hopes. The people of Iraq are as sick of the bastard as we are, despite what Iraq's equivalent of Claptrap No News might say. Once the army sees the full amount of shit heading their way, they will come in in droves to surrendur and swap sides. If the allies had supported the Kurdish revolt in 1991 instead of sitting on their collective arseholes, then something similar would have happened then. In the end it won't be our overwhelming technological advantage that will break the tached wanker. It'll be his own people not being wiling to fight for him.
It's just horus to wait before it begins now. I'm expecting a lot of bloody overtime!
D
Deleted member 2452
Guest
i don't think you anti-war folks realize...
the wrangling, and "diplomatic failure" in the u.n. over the last month has not been over using peacefull means to disarm iraq!~ it's been over who will join us in using fource! leaving things up to iraq to comply with the u.n. resolutions was never a question. it was only how long were we, and our alies going to let him dick around, before we finally do something, and who was going to to party with us.
so please, get it straight, if diplomacy had worked, then french, and german troops would be going also, that's the only difference.
steve
the wrangling, and "diplomatic failure" in the u.n. over the last month has not been over using peacefull means to disarm iraq!~ it's been over who will join us in using fource! leaving things up to iraq to comply with the u.n. resolutions was never a question. it was only how long were we, and our alies going to let him dick around, before we finally do something, and who was going to to party with us.
so please, get it straight, if diplomacy had worked, then french, and german troops would be going also, that's the only difference.
steve
Haltickling
2nd Level Green Feather
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2001
- Messages
- 4,353
- Points
- 0
Why most of Europe is against this war
I wrote a lengthy reply to some very interesting and important questions from Joby, explaining the reasons why most of Europe is against this war:
http://www.ticklingforum.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=175883#post175883
I wrote a lengthy reply to some very interesting and important questions from Joby, explaining the reasons why most of Europe is against this war:
http://www.ticklingforum.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=175883#post175883
