[Drjones]

I came up with this while responding to someone about the war via email:

Here's something for YOU to think about: A man with ties to the terrorist network that killed several thousand American Civilians on our soil has Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological weapons. He not only refuses to give up what he has, but he will not tell anyone what exactly he has, he continues to manufacture said weapons, and defies and lies to those who are trying to disarm him. (Primarily of course, the USA and the UN)

What do you make of that?

------------------

:D

I think I just convinced myself about the war!!!!

[Atticus]

I was trying to think of an anology to counter the arguments of a liberal co-worker of mine.

I picture Saddam as a neighbor of mine (or his) who has recently attacked his neighbor's house. He killed a few members of the neighbor's family. Then he set their car on fire and dumped oil and gas all over their lawn. He then went home and killed his mother- in -law because she dared to complain about him. The police show up and tell him they won't even arrest him if he will knock it off, tell them what weapons he has, and throw them ALL out on the lawn. He tells them thta the only gun he has is a Hi- Point pistol and throws it out. Everyone knows he has a dozen or more weapons because they saw them. They also know that he has a suitcase full of dynamite.

The police decide to give him a year to make the right decision and surrender the guns. If he does, they will (again) not press charges and will only disarm him.

A year later he still refuses to co-operate and claims that he sold the guns. The police ask for a receipt. He claims he lost it. The police are finally realizing that they must go in after him. Chief Inspector Clouseau wants SWAT to surrender and Mayor Rheinhard won't intervene, saying that the Police must show restraint and give Saddam more time. After all, Saddam owns all the Crispy Creams in town and their supply will end when Saddam goes.

The ending is still unknown........................l

Warning - this story does not translate well into French.

[Gary H]

Drjones:

I do not believe that any "expert" believes that Saddam has nuclear weapons..yet.

I am convinced that those that are against the war are beyond convincing. They view the world as they would like it to be and your arguments will not break through this underlying self-deception.

The bottom line is that we are at the early stages of a long term war against Muslim fundamentalist. We are about to occupy territory that is perfect for launching attacks against these forces. We will not need to bribe other countries to allow us to do what is needed. Secondly, Iraq will become a model for what can be done in that region. The people will vastly improve their lot and this will not go unnoticed. Iraq as been ruled by a non-sectarian government and will demonstrate the good generated by a non-sectarian democracy. That will be the most powerful weapon that we can yield. Now, give up on arguing your case. Everyone's mind .. or lack thereof.. is made up.

[Standing Wolf]

I believe the majority of the people who oppose our action against Iraq are plain old-fashioned anti-Americans who care nothing one way or a dozen others about the issues or Iraq.

[Drjones]

I believe the majority of the people who oppose our action against Iraq are plain old-fashioned anti-Americans who care nothing one way or a dozen others about the issues or Iraq.

DING DING DING!!!

You won the million dollar prize!!!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A25043-2003Jan21&notFound=true

(I think for the wash. post article you have to give your zip and some other minor info. Just make something up, you MUST read that article!)

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30774

[EJ]

We can't just go home now--again----
We need to finish this--

[Malone LaVeigh]

A man with ties to the terrorist network that killed several thousand American Civilians on our soil ...

What do you make of that? I figure your first sentence is unsupported, so the rest of it is worthless.

[CampX]

Hi. I am not anti-American. Nice label. Right up there with labeling someone anti-Semitic. It's a good way for a close-minded person to argue back when presented with views that differ from that of the status quo.
I oppose open war in Iraq. Show me the proof that Saddam had a hand in the Sept11 attacks. Prove to me that he has anthrax and other goodies in the 1000's of gallons. Prove to me that he is threat to the entire world. You want to bomb the heck out of a country just because of it's leaders? Ya, I think Bush is an utter moron and the most dangerous man on the planet. Does that mean trying to get the support of the rest of the world so we can bomb Washington to kill him?
The ball is rolling, the States has already spent a bazillion dollars shipping men and materiel to the area, it's a GO. They won't turn around and come home now. I just pray that a whole lot of good young American soldiers DON'T die because Bush and his warmongering cronies are so primed to do it.
By the way, the bigger talk right now is of the gas prices skyrocketing over this impending war. GAS. You can swear up and down that this is for peace and to get rid of terrorism, but GAS is what drives the US. So, what's up with Saudi Arabia? They make major contributions to the terrorist coffers, and are very anti-American, but why do the States pussy-foot around the Sheiks???? You got 'er Earl, GAS. Kinda stinks.

[EJ]

Should'a been handled ten years ago--

[Atticus]

CampX:

If Bush had a past record of invading Canada and killing a million people in the process, then you might have a point in bombing DC.... but then you don't have an Airforce eh, and the Europeans would not help you.

What do you suppose Iraq did with the tons of bio/chem weapons that were documented by the previous UN weapons inspectors (including many non-Americans)? Do you really think he destoyed them? Would you like to buy the World trade Center cheap?

The US does not need Iraqs oil- the French do- which is why they want no part of this.

[Mike Irwin]

"I do not believe that any "expert" believes that Saddam has nuclear weapons..yet."


I've been thinking quite a bit about this point.

Quite frankly, Iraq wouldn't need to be making its own nuclear weapons.

There are far too many former Soviet nuclear weapons that are either unaccounted for, or poorly accounted for.

Several months ago I was dead set against military action in Iraq.

I'm still not 100% convinced that military action is a necessity, but I'm one hell of a lot closer to it now than I was 3 months ago.

[Gary H]

CampX:

You are a bit over the top. Take a deep breath. Bush is doing what it takes to fight this war. Ten percent of the Muslim world wants non-Muslims converted. If Bush was what you say, then he would start with Canada. What would your country do should thousands of your citizens be murdered? Would you wait for the next attack, or would you come up with a plan to fight the war.? Bush stated that the war would take upwards of ten years. That means that he recognizes that we are fighting more than Osama. When I use the word we, I'm not including you.

Mike:

You have put your finger on the problem. We are now trying to eliminate possible sources for WMDs. What happens when a state gives these weapons to individuals that can deliver them to our shores? I doubt that we will be able to preempt all such attacks and the critics will strongly condemn such actions. What I don't understand is that they also were screaming that we should have prevented the 9-11 attacks. I have met such people. One acquaintance believes that we should wait for a WMD to go off here before responding. I asked him how we would know what country sponsored the attack. He didn't have an answer.

[CZ-75]

I figure your first sentence is unsupported, so the rest of it is worthless.


I suppose those weapons training camps set up by al-Qaeda lieutenants in NW Iraq were just a figment of Colin Powell's imagination?

Or, perhaps, because he didn't have a photo of Saddam shaking hands with them, Saddam must be ignorant of their presence?

Or, perhaps they weren't weapons training camps at all, but summer camps for underprivileged Iraqi children.

As to the rest of it being worthless, tell me the possible usage of aluminum tubes that are manufactured to tighter tolerances than anything the US uses for it's own missles. Maybe Saddam is a perfectionist.

Could it be that these tubes need to be precisely made because they are actually centrifuge rotors? Centrifuges that could only be used to enrich uranium.

But why does Saddam need uranium? His only reactor was put out of commission by Israel in '81. Perhaps he's embarking on his own 'Atoms for Peace' plan and will be the good uranium fairy for the third world. Maybe he's going to build a new reactor and is stocking up on uranium now.

Or maybe he's getting ready to build a nuke.

I know what we should do. Let's inspect Iraq for another 3 years, withdraw our troops, let him send the tripled number inspectors home 2-3 months after we de-escalate and withdraw, then start over again, only giving him another few years to finish everything in the process and give it all to Osama to special deliver to the US. Rinse, lather, and repeat.


:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Lord Grey Boots]

Does Saddam have nuclear weapons yet? No.

Has he got everything except the enriched uranium? Apparently he does. He has several programs going on to try to make the equipment so he can enrich the uranium within Iraq.

So, he's still working on that particular WMD.

However, bio and chemical weapons he does have, has used them previously, and is silent about what happened to them.

[Khornet]

Where ya been lately? Haven't heard a peep! Me, I'm gonna just let the bait drift by...how 'bout you? Beats getting ulcers.

[Chris Rhines]

I suppose those weapons training camps set up by al-Qaeda lieutenants in NW Iraq were just a figment of Colin Powell's imagination? That, or deliberate lies or misrepresentations. I don't put anything past the government.

A man with ties to the terrorist network that killed several thousand American Civilians on our soil... See above. There is no credible evidence that this is the case, certainly not enough to justify invasion.

...has Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological weapons. I am unimpressed by the claims that a nation with large stockpiles of NBC weapons has the ethical authority to decide what other nations may or may not maintain similar stockpiles.

Saddam is the legitimate head of government in Iraq (as legitimate as any government can be, anyway.) He has every right to stockpile the weapons of his choice, and his doing so provides no ethical justification for invasion.

I picture Saddam as a neighbor of mine (or his) who has recently attacked his neighbor's house. He killed a few members of the neighbor's family. Then he set their car on fire and dumped oil and gas all over their lawn. He then went home and killed his mother- in -law because she dared to complain about him. If the Kuwaitis, the Israelis, or the Iraqi Kurds want to do something, no one will hear a peep of complaint from me. But if they want to overthrow Iraq, then they can foot the bill themselves. My taxes are already high enough without paying international welfare.

- Chris

[Atticus]

Chris: As much as you hate Government control, I would love to see you live in Iraq for a year and then give us a report on that "legitimate Government". Iraq's intelligence agency is East German trained and is 10 times as brutal. Saddam controls every facet of daily life, and dissent is met with death ...or worse. I really can't wait until the people are liberated, and all of Saddam's dirty secrets are unearthed and hit the (reasonably)free press. Then folks like yourself can then explain to us why we have should minded our own business. Five years from now PBS will be running specials on the horrors of Iraq under Saddam- much like they did after Cambodia was liberated by Vietnam.

[Neal Bloom]

I really don't like seeing young Americans dying in a war. But since it looks like a 'go' then lets go in and finish it quickly. Don't pussyfoot around but finish the job that should have been finished in Desert Storm.

Then lets look at alternative fuel sources so that we have no dependancy on oil. Send them back to the stone age overnight.

[Master Blaster]

Using logic to argue with these folks is pointless, because they dont want to hear or see the Facts.

In 1991 Sadaam tried to take over all of the oil in the Middle east, that would have made him a world power to be reconned with.

We prevented that from happening. Sadaam is the only head of state in any country to use poison gas as a weapon in a war, and on his own people since world war one. Even Hitler dared not use poison gas for fear of the retaliation against Germany.
Sadaam has no Qualms about this. Sadaam is a ruthless madman, possibly worse than Adolph Hitler.

If we leave Sadaam alone he will develop a nuclear weapon or several, he will once again try to control the middle east oil supply. (need I explain why that is important?) If the Israelis had not bombed the reactor sold to them by our friends the french he would have had a nuke in 1991, and he would now either control the middle east or there would have been a nuclear war with Israel. If hecan control the oil he will have unlimited funds and power to expand Iraqi control as far as his dreams will take him. He will slaughter millions of innocents.
Oil is of vital strategic importance to the US and to Europe.
He will become an unstoppable threat if we dont not stop him Now while we can. Remember Hitler, he just wanted a little Libensraum, just the Suddaten land, and a little of Alsace, no need to start a war, we cantrust Him said Neville Chamberlain, we can make peace with him as an ally said Uncle Joe Stalin.
Sadaam just wants a missile or two, just a bomb or two, we can trust him too just like we trusted Hitler.

He supports Terrorists,openly paying the families of suicide bombers $25,000 for the work of their "martyrs"

The same dingbats who think that we should not attack Iraq will be blaming Bush, when Iraq explodes in a couple of years, for doing nothing.

If in August 1999 Clinton had said that we have evidence that 20 men from afghanistan are going to attack america and we need to raid their camps, everyone arguing against a war with Iraq would have poo pooed it.

Sometimes the best defense is a good offense.

[Don Gwinn]

I still haven't made up my mind on invading Iraq, but I'm grudgingly coming around to a position of support. This is not easy for me, frankly, because I don't want to see Son or John hurt.

I have a question for you, Chris. Could you define the word "legitimate" for me?

[Pendragon]

Saddam = legit? wow.

Saddam, by his actions, has earned our distrust and therefore a very low standard of proof should be required.

It comes to this:

You trust what the US Gov is saying, or you don't.

I believe Bush, and I say its time to bomb Saddam.

[anchored]

I'm starting to think the US is playing a big game of good cop/bad cop with france and germany and the UN. The buildup is for effect, since a threat of force is only as good as the other person's belief you can and will use it. So far, it seems to be working. Everytime we reach the end of our zero tolerance, an ally grabs us by the arm and says, "Hold on there, buddy, don't hit him yet!" so we can say "Lemme at 'im!" If we keep it up and maintain our credibility, Bush may go down in history as winning the first bloodless world war. It's just too bad CNN can't air disclaimers only US citizens can see. "We're about to blow up Iraq! (not really) Really! (shhh!) The US is going to start dropping bombs anytime now! (just kidding)" Of course, we can't do that, so we have to convince even our selves we're going to do it.

[Khornet]

your perspective is off. We, as a nation with NBC weapons are perfectly entitled to judge Iraq, because....WE HAVEN'T USED OURS ON ANYBODY. Saddam has, tho.

Sure, there's Hiroshima/Nagasaki, but we were at war with them. And in the 57 years since then, including 3 major conflicts and some minor ones, we haven't used NBC. We are eminently qualified to demand Saddam disarm.

[Gary H]

I thought that U.S. and the Russians had destroyed our stockpiles of chemical and biologic weapons under treaty.

Can you assure me that Saddam will not provide these weapons to terrorist?

Have you noticed any actions on the part of Saddam that make him suspect?

Do you really believe that there is moral equivalence between Saddam's Iraq and the U.S.?

Do you believe that the U.S. should be proactive with regards to preventing future terrorist attacks, or do you believe that we should be only reactive?

Do you believe Saddam's assertions as to U.S. motives in Iraq vs. the U.S. government's stated position?

[Monkeyleg]

Do I know whether Saddam has NBC weapons? No. But the UN resolutions require HIM to prove that he's disposed of what he had. To date, he has not done so.

As for trying to establish some sort of moral equivalency between the US and Iraq with regard to NBC weapons, let's use a different scenario. You're a law-abiding citizen and have a dozen safes full of guns. The violent drug dealer down the street has three guns. Should the police arrest him, or arrest him and you?

Just as with gun control, the anti-violence crowd thinks that passing another law/resolution will do the trick. The UN has already passed 17 resolutions regarding Iraq, and Saddam's violated every one.

Months back, I wasn't convinced about the need to go to war. Now I believe that we need to get rid of Saddam before he gains more power. The longer we wait, the worse the war will be for our side.

[moa]

The UN has essentially been in a state of war with Iraq since around 1990/91. And the shooting has never really stopped. Iraq often fires at coalition aircraft in the no-fly zones that Iraq agreed to observe.

In 1998, before the inspectors left Iraq due to interference and non-compliance, they knew Iraq had thousands of chemical munitions, thousands of gallons of chemical weapons, and a great deal of biological weapons. This has all been documented.

Iraq has failed to satisfactorily prove that those weapons no longer exist.

The USA, UK and other nations are only enforcing the UN resolutions in the face of UN's lack of resoluteness to get to end of job.

I am hoping with the great massing of forces outside his borders, that Saddam will see the jig is up, and go into a self imposed exile before he and his family get wacked by a JDAM or cruise missile.

Or, worse for him an his family, get caught by a furious Iraqi mob bent on revenge.

[Shalako]

1.) Sadaam has Bio/Chemical weapons and has used them on his own people (USA doesn't typically do that)
2.) Gassing your own people (who you are supposed to protect) is to me the ultimate form of terrorism
3.) After 9/11, George Bush said we have had enough of terrorism and will root it out where ever it hides and destroy it

If this thread can handle one more analogy, I see it like this:
In your neighborhood, there is a craven madman that every once in a while kills some of his own children. The whole neighborhood knows this is going on but figures it is none of their business and they just keep trying to look the other way. They also don't want to anger the guy if you know what I mean. But, there is one guy in the neighborhood who is the biggest toughest dude on the block and he is tired of the apathy of the rest of the neighbors. When a driveby harms one of his children, he sees that the neighborhood is really going downhill. He finally says, 'enough is enough, if you other guys aren't going to help me get rid of this madman, and clean up this place, I'll take him out myself'.

To all those madmen in the neighborhood, your days are numbered. 9/11 was the last straw for looking the other way.

[gburner]

Those of you who find the word of our government suspect as regards this crisis, yet believe the pronouncements of Sadaam need to see your travel agents and book flights to Iraq immediately.

Once there, embrace the thrill of knowing that you are truly doing something right and just by standing up for this great statesman in his time of
trial and suffering.

If you should happen to survive the multiple layers of intrigue, spies, systematic torture, rape and murder, not to mention the very distinct possibility of being used as a propaganda puppet and unwilling human shield...don't come back. We've had our fill of Jane Fonda wanna be's.

PS...If this were about oil, the 82nd Airborne would be in Ottowa, the 101st in Caracas and several Marine divisions would be in Mexico city. There are easier pickins.

[Gary H]

PS...If this were about oil, the 82nd Airborne would be in Ottowa, the 101st in Caracas and several Marine divisions would be in Mexico city. There are easier pickins.

Rather nicely stated..

:neener:

[Malone LaVeigh]

I suppose those weapons training camps set up by al-Qaeda lieutenants in NW Iraq were just a figment of Colin Powell's imagination? No, they're a piece of Colin Powell's deception. Check out Revealed: Truth Behind US 'Poison Factory' Claim (http://commondreams.org/headlines03/0209-09.htm) . It's a reprint from the UK press, so most of you true believers in the US propaganda machine probably won't buy it.:rolleyes:
As to the rest of it being worthless, tell me the possible usage of aluminum tubes that are manufactured to tighter tolerances than anything the US uses for it's own missles. Maybe Saddam is a perfectionist. Boy are you behind the times. That was last year's soundbite from the Ministry of Truth. Disproven not long after the inspectors went in. I would look up the reference, but it's not worth it.
Where ya been lately? Haven't heard a peep! Me, I'm gonna just let the bait drift by...how 'bout you? Beats getting ulcers. I don't get ulcers, I give 'em.
In 1998, before the inspectors left Iraq due to interference and non-compliance, they knew Iraq had thousands of chemical munitions, thousands of gallons of chemical weapons, and a great deal of biological weapons. This has all been documented. What was documented by the UN inspectors the first time around is that approximately 95% of the weapons had been accounted for and destroyed.
Iraq has failed to satisfactorily prove that those weapons no longer exist. A negative cannot be proven. Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

We're talking about starting a huge war. It should be up to us to do the proving. So far, I am not convinced.

[WilderBill]

What I make of that is that Saddam either thinks he can lie and bluff his way through this or he is not asking, but insisting on having a great deal of ordinance delivered to his neighborhood in a most precise and unfriendly way.

[CZ-75]

No, they're a piece of Colin Powell's deception. Check out Revealed: Truth Behind US 'Poison Factory' Claim . It's a reprint from the UK press, so most of you true believers in the US propaganda machine probably won't buy it.


Okay, I read it. I like getting my news from the so-called "progressive" press, which I think tends to be a euphemism for "Marxist."

What I read was that a bunch of "journalists," probably from the 'Guardian,' 'Mother Jones,' 'Village Voice,' etc. were taken on a tour of a facility that might not have even been the correct one, or one that was cleaned out by Saddam's crews. I seriously doubt a newsflunky would know what to look for to ascertain signs of cleanup and intentional deception from Iraqi intelligence services.

Oh, I see this does come from the 'Guardian.'

'If Colin Powell were to come here he would see that we have nothing to hide,' he said. But Ansar's sources of funding remain mysterious - and their real purpose tantalizingly unclear. 'All Ansar fighters are from Iraq,' Hassan said. 'Iraq is one of the richest countries in the world. Our fighters have brought their own things with them.'

Sure makes me confident. Islamic thug/"freedom fighter"/possible terrorist of questionable means makes an offer to the US. But that doesn't set off a red flag for progressive types, since these folks are "victimized" by Western (read "US") imperialism. Besides, Colin Powell and the Ministry of Truth have nothing to do with it.

But while they appear to pose no real threat to Washington or London, Ansar's fighters are a brutal bunch. They have so far killed more than 800 opposition Kurdish fighters. They have shot dead several civilians. They have even tried - last April - to assassinate the Prime Minister of the neighboring town of Sulamaniyah, the mild-mannered Dr Barham Salih. The plot went wrong and two of the assassins were shot dead. A third is in prison. 'We are fed up with them. We wish they would go away,' one villager, who refused to be named, said.

Nice bunch of folks, eh? Probably kill those not deemed "faithful" while they sleep.

Boy are you behind the times. That was last year's soundbite from the Ministry of Truth. Disproven not long after the inspectors went in. I would look up the reference, but it's not worth it.

This is shorthand for "I read it in 'Mother Jones.'" No facts = BS. Please post the source. These the same keystone inspectors that had to ask Iraqi officials how to get to their inspection sites and arrive minutes after the cleanup crews get done deconing the sites?


Funny how some believe tin-pot murdering dictators, Islamic thugs, socialist newspapers, and incompetent UN inspectors who get their contacts killed over democratically elected governments.


I suppose we should've believed Jane Fonda about the wonderful treatment our POWs were receiving in Vietnam during her staged tour of the Hanoi Hilton, too? Just about anybody can make something look good for an hour or two visit by a non-expert, or worse yet, a willing dupe.

[Master Blaster]

?It's a reprint from the UK press, so most of you true believers in the US propaganda machine probably won't buy it.


You do realize that there is no constitutional freedom of the press in the UK, and the press there prints what the government tells them to print? You have heard of the BBC, which is a government entity right? Here in the US the press does print what they want.

Nixon sure was not able to stop the Washington Post from Blowing Watergate open was he?

Our press may be leftist turds, but they are not controled by the government the way the UK press is. :o