War on Iraq or No?

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Should the Bush administration take military action against Iraq in order to help prevent future terror attacks against America? Why?

[Iris]

Let me think about it.... er....NOOOO! I doubt bombing Iraq has much to do with preventing terror attacks, and even if it does (which I sincerely doubt) another war wont help. It'll probably just create more terrorists who want to see America destroyed, and with a good reason as well. If Bush really wants to prevent other terror attacks he should really rethink his international politics.

[SuicideisPainless]

Should Bush bomb Iraq because he believes it to be a terrorist state?
No, if he is going to do this he has to bomb America itself who has funded the IRA and other paramilitary organisations, it has to bomb Britain for the same reasons, it has to bomb Ireland, Spain, France, Holland, Germany, Russia, Italy, the whole of the Far East, the whole of the MIddle EAst which he is probably going to do anyway, he may as well just put a few thousand nukes in space set the sateleitte towards earth and blow it up that will solve the TERRORIST PROBLEM.

Is the real reason he wants to bomb Iraq for the Oil?

yes it is, this war has nothing to do with terror and he should stop hiding behind that mask of "war on terror",

THE ONLY TERRORIST IN THIS FIGHT IS GEORGE DUBYA BUSH AND HIS ARSE LICKING DOG TONY BLAIR

[Aleksander Nordby]

The only way that bush attacks iraq is becuse i wants oil.

[GuErRrIlLa]

NO, Bush think he is trying to get rid of terrism, when he is commiting acts of terrism, going to war with Iraq just for oil?? Innocent peoples lives are worth more than oil.

[deimos]

It seems like I'm the only one here who is for a war against Iraq. I'm also the only one who is from Iraqi Kurdistan and who lost relatives there except Hawarameen.
Saddam Hussein murdered many civilists. I think its better to remove Saddam now, otherwise he could terrorize his people for another 20 years!

(Edited by deimos at 6:45 pm on Dec. 12, 2002)

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Oil not important enough in our society??Guess again.

Bush has worked in the oil-industry so he knows how important it is.

The whole society of nowadays is resting on oil. Take away oil and the whole Industry ,cars etc stop working.

Factorys out of business means that the workers will get fired and then the superiors of the workers get fired and then their superiors and then their...

Eventually evey bussines that has to do with oil at anyway stops, wich is pretty much everything except humans and animals.

What have we now? A lot of fired, jobless ppl. Who cant count on money from the government because there are too much who have no jobs and no food.

These turn into hungry ,angry ppl. Wich will cause riotings and social disorder. Look at the last time that large quantity's of ppl were jobless, hungry and angry(Russia revolt, Europe almost, America social problems, Africa social problems)

After the whole nation (and the rest of the world who strongly depend on the US economy just like 1930's) is in total anarchy and chaos there will be a change of power. Or one strong man grabs all power(famous example: Napoleon) or the nation decides to govern together(never really happened if u ask me) and the third last option wich would have a pretty good chance in the US is:

Ppl who feel attracted to each other and feel that they belong to the same group will start own nations and fight for it( Like : State of California/ New Yorkia or somethin) maybe they want nations depend on skincolor, origin,social class etc etc.



However it means the fall of America and maybe Captalism and a "good patriotic american" doesnt want that and whats the solution: OIL.

Untill there is a replacer of oil, it will remain very important and nations are prepared to whipe others out for it. If they dont get it, their nation will be destroyed. Thats way they rather have another nation destroyed than their owns. There isnt one government in the world who says that they wont kill for oil.

(Edited by CCCP at 6:14 pm on Dec. 12, 2002)

[Ian]

We all see where you are coming from Deimos, but the US has been the government terrorising the Iraqi people for the last 11 years, and if we take it one step further they have been directly responsible for Saddam's whole reign. Fuck, they provided him with weapons, germs, gas, tanks and choppers. They even gave his Ba'ath party radio equipment with which they broadcast the names of thousands of communists who were then slaughtered in the streets.

The United States will not install a benevolent regime, they will install a regime friendly to american oil companies.

What we must do is not attack Iraq, we must be charitable and send health packages etc to the PEOPLE of Iraq, not the fucking government. We must express true SOLIDARITY with these people and hope that they can choose the path to self determination.

[oconner]

Definatly not. Bush only wants to prove he can be a 'great general' like the other presidents and he is prepared to bomb innocent people to do this

[BOZG]

The overthrow of Saddam Hussein must come from below, from the people in the streets. They are the only people who know what is best for themselves. They need to take control of their own lives and seize their own "freedom".

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Damn no reply's to my piece. Took so long to write.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

CCCP is quite right, American economy largely rests on the oil industry. If Saddam is not a favorable person to negotiate with, Bush will find a way to get someone new. Even if there is no evidence of terrorist activity in Iarq.

[AufklarenEins]

should bush attack iraq?
i think the question is better focused when said "should bush protect the rights of americans and the right to investigte all other military powers that would be a threat to its own?"
the US is the fucking karma police. we have the power. we live good lives. why? because we have the power. and because we can enforce it, cockface. would you rather your children die starving and cold like in other countries? or do you want to keep this wonderful life CAPITALISM has endowed you with. thats right. jobs. money. trent reznor said it best:
God, money I'll do anything for you
God, money just tell me what you want me to...
God, money lets go dancing on the backs of the poor
God, money he doesn't want everything he wants it all
No you can't take, no you can't take it, no you can't take that away from me!

so when you ask if we should go to war with iraq if they are a potential threat, i say thats a stupid question, because, much like thomas paine, i would rather have war in my time to have peace in the times of my children. fuckin' commies.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Finaly replies.:biggrin:

[Socialist Pig]

You think with the money It'd take to invade and install a puppet government in Iraq American could research alternative energy sources. Its just like capitalism to disregard the rights of future generations just for the sake of profits.

[Kilian]

I think that Bush should not attack Iraq because it will only hurt the people of Iraq. But what should we do then to overthrow the oppressive government.

[Socialist Pig]

Quote: from Kilian on 10:53 pm on Dec. 19, 2002
I think that Bush should not attack Iraq because it will only hurt the people of Iraq. But what should we do then to overthrow the oppressive government.

As Ian said before, all we can do is express our solidarity with the people of Iraq and hope they can choose the right path.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Yup u are right. If they start we should let no day pass by without telling the world the true story about the war in Iraq. Just like Vietnam. I see massive protests, debats on TV about the war, hugh publicity for the socialist cause andso on and on.

[Behind enemy lines]

I'm not sure that the media will provide good coverage on Iraq protests and so on. They are sons of whores.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

They do ,if we start a (free) leftist news paper.

[SlimShady4538]

No fucking way!!!! the US gave Saddam his chem weapons and bombs in the earlie ninties. so Bush is just complaining about something the US gave Iraq. He calls this Patriotism? Isn't the word HIPOCRACY?

[Pavan Sohal]

The transfers were in the 80s, not the 90s. The whole Ba'ath party was set up by the United States to fight the Iranians in the Iran-Iraq war (in which 1million died). And why did they have to fight the Iranians? Because Iran had gone all Muslim Fundamentalist because of the man America propped up there, "The Shah of Iran". Basically EVERYONE hated the Shah, and it united the Leftists with the Ayatollahs (supposedly impossible). The Shah was there under American backing, leading an increasingly unpopular regime which replaced the CIA overthrown Mossadeq (PM of Iran). Mossadeq was overthrown by the CIA because he threatened to nationalize Iran's oil.

[Insomnia]

This is just another way for the americans to impose their point of view. it`s liek written in the fuckin` US constitution by now! every american president has to interfere in at least on coutry`s internal politics and make a big fuss about it. what about the independance of that country? isn`t it supposed to provide the safety of internal politics, isn`t every country free to make whatever decisions it pleases wich regard it`s internal policies??? the oil stor tops it all... it`s a well known fact that the american government would do anything to get oil at a cheap price for the american people and the people will support the government which gets them oil at a low price so they can cruise in theyr fuckin` cadillacs all day with a consumption of 22 litres / 100km. well think it`s just fucked up and the fact that the american people would accept a war just so they can get oil at a cheap price is outrageous.

[anger is a gift]

fuck war with Iraq. how about war on hunger or war on ignorance. personally i would like to see a war on ignorant white assholes like GWB. to me it is so funny that we can impose rules and treaties on other soverign nations. also, after we broke, violated or just plain never planned on honoring over 400 treaties and agreements with the various indian tribes, how can we demand that saddam comply with our rules? who are we kidding?

[socialist ballistix]

Personally, i think this whole presdiency has been a sham. Bush is obviously just corporate business's *****. So i think the U.N should realize what is really going on, and seize weapons from the us, too. Im sure weve got some serious shit cooking up somewhere. I mean, come on, we had that entire shadow government thing, where we had a whole backup government. In case one white asshole got shot, antoher whit asshole can take his place.

[queen of diamonds]

Poor Bush. Two hundred years ago, if someone wanted more conquests all they had to do was go fight. Now, he's got to justify it....

(By the way, that was sarcastic)

If there is a war with Iraq - with the support of any of the peoples of the globe, it will be a show of ignorance that must work to disgust us all.
In short, no.

[Esteban of the North]

War with Iraq? NO!

Bush's feeble attempts to justify an attack on Iraq can impossibly conceal the fact that the entire war is a commercial war, meant to supplant Saddam with an Americanist puppet who will supply the US with oil and keep the Iraqi's from exercising their democratic rights, just as Saddam is doing.

A war would undoubtedly instigate mass killing of Hussains political opponents, not to mention the civilian victims who would fall in the American 'precision' bombings. It is also likely that the Kurds, who have struggled for centuries to escape their relative oppressors, will once again fall victim to the cruelty of the regime - as was the case in the last Gulf War, when the Americans betrayed their cause, when they were no longer of strategic use.

This senseless war, that defies all aspects of intelligence and democracy, must NOT take place.

[PlasticJesus]

Quote: from Behind enemy lines on 10:45 am on Dec. 20, 2002
I'm not sure that the media will provide good coverage on Iraq protests and so on. They are sons of whores.


During Thanksgiving weekend C-SPAN had filmed an anti-war protest in Washington D.C and it aired many times.

[Kilian]

Quote: from CCCP on 9:51 am on Dec. 20, 2002
Yup u are right. If they start we should let no day pass by without telling the world the true story about the war in Iraq. Just like Vietnam. I see massive protests, debats on TV about the war, hugh publicity for the socialist cause andso on and on.


February 15th will be the anti-war day in europe so go out and protest

WE CAN STOP THIS BLOODY WAR!

[PlasticJesus]

Quote: from SlimShady4538 on 7:44 pm on Dec. 24, 2002
No fucking way!!!! the US gave Saddam his chem weapons and bombs in the earlie ninties. so Bush is just complaining about something the US gave Iraq. He calls this Patriotism? Isn't the word HIPOCRACY?


During the Administration of Ronald Reagan, sixty helicopters were sold to Iraq. Later reports said Iraq used U.S.-made helicopters to spray Kurds with chemical weapons. According to The Washington Post, Iraq used mustard gas against Iran with the help of intelligence from the CIA.

Throughout 1989 and 1990, U.S. companies, with the permission of the first Bush Administration, sent to the government of Saddam Hussein mustard gas precursors and live cultures for bacteriological research. U.S. companies also helped to build a chemical weapons factory and supplied the West Nile virus, fuel air explosive technology, computers for weapons technology, hydrogen cyanide precursors, computers for weapons research and development, and vacuum pumps and bellows for nuclear weapons plants.

[TheEndOfMan]

I think you all know where i stand....... NO WAR IN IRAQ! DOWN WITH THE USA!

[caprisun]

im with deimos-for the war! saddam hussein is a flipping butcher and the iraqis are desperate to get rid of him...but rising against him has been impossible...all their attempts have been in vain. i mean, he poisoned his own ppl...he sends a bill for the bullet to the families of those he has killed...right before he goes on to terminate them jst for being related to them..i hate bush, the US government, their foreign policy and their real motives for this war. but despite this, i have to admit that as an iraqi, i do support this war. the iraqis cant possibly defeat him on their own. they need external help, but the dilemma is no country would help this oppressed ppl, or intefere in another country's internal politics out of the "goodness of their hearts". The US is interfering, but only becasue they can exploit the situation and use it to their advantage. like they really think he's a threat. bullshit. so what to do...most iraqis support this war, but americas gonna screw us once its there.

(Edited by caprisun at 5:39 pm on Dec. 31, 2002)

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

You are fully aware that that means:
[list]Another Hamid Karzai
They will be stuck on the new exploiters forever
Millions in the previous Gulf war died and so will in the next
That it's only the people of a nation who can start a revolution or demand changes, wich benefit them.
That it would mean trading a dictator for a slavemaster
The new regime would be even more difficult to overthrow thanks to support of the USA
It means the prisoning of a whole nation
The new regime would be legitimate
Thanks to more uranium, Iraqi soil would be unusefull for hunderds of years, wich causes a foodshortage

If the majority of the Iraqi's would like to get rid of Saddam, they would do something against it.

Would you punish the druglord or the guy on the streets?

America is the druglord and Saddam the guy on the street. It was Americas idea to poisin and Saddam carried it out. Punish both.

How do you know so surtain that Saddam is an evil *****? He is intelligent, tolerates Christians, Jews, Americans, Westerners dispait their hatred against Saddam.

Read some about my revolution theory's.

[TheEndOfMan]

Atleast he is articulate... Unlike Bush....

Saddam's letters once more:
http://www.freedomdomain.com/Templemount/saddam1.html

http://www.freedomdomain.com/Templemount/9_19a.html

[Aufklaren]

Ok. Since you leftist bastards decided not to let me post again under one name, i decided to make another.

First of all the last groundwar in Iraq lasted for less than 100 hours. More soldiers under Saddam surrendered for 3 square meals a day and a decent place to sleep than died. you fuckfaces think that it cost millions of lives?!? it didn't even cost thousands!

The fact of the matter is, Saddam is quite the threat, even if merely theoretical, to the US and should be taken out of power. Of course we will put in another leader that is US friendly. not because they have oil, but because they have the capability of gaining weapons of mass destruction. most of the US oil comes from US FRIENDLY COUNTRIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

Of course this won't be a bloodless struggle and saddam won't roll-over, but who would? You want to let Saddam build up his weapons and gain the ability to kill americans? then you go fucking live in Iraq, because i would prefer not to die early in life because some pyscho ***** decided he doesn't like capitalism. i was raised in it, i enjoy you, and millions, almost billions of other people, american born or not, enjoy it.

so the next time you fucking drive around in your car, ride around on your bike, or do whatever it is you fuckers do, remember that capitalism fucking makes that possible dickfaces. (unless you live in china. feel free to speak about communism if you're chinese).

Saddam tolerates all sorts because there's no fucking variety. everyone is too damn afraid to stray from the path of saddam because everyone who does in any fashion is slaughtered. he doesn't tolerate people, he destroys the ones that are different.

iraqi soil isn't good for much at this point anyway, so i'm not exactly sure what innate point that was trying to make.
thats my piece.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

FRIENDLY MIDDLE EAST COUNTRY'S? LoooL

Where do u think Bin Laden comes from?
Did u think that Bin Laden's ten million is enough to set up and run Al'Qaida?
And where do u think the rest of the money comes from?
What did the CIA in Afganistan?
Why did the prince of Arabia talk about support to Al'Qaida in name of the Saudi Government?
If Iraq is such a big threat to the US because of mass detruction weapons, why is Russia not?
And if Russia is, why don't u invade them?
Why not N Korea?
Why not Pakistan(who has it for a long time now)
Who has the biggest nuclear and chemical stock in the world?
Who uses radioactive materials in war on regular base?
Shouldn't we raise against the biggest holder of nukes and then the little guys?
Doesn't the biggest represant the biggest threat?
Why did the US support Saddam in 1980's?

[abstractmentality]

Quote: from Aufklaren on 9:47 am on Jan. 8, 2003
The fact of the matter is, Saddam is quite the threat, even if merely theoretical, to the US and should be taken out of power. Of course we will put in another leader that is US friendly.
by this rational, the US is a threat to Iraq, so Iraq should therefore have the power and obligation to attack the US and put in a new leadership that is friendly to Iraq. i dont know about you, but this is not something i would support, and you should examine your own logic in more depth before posting anything like this again.

if i had Slaughterhouse Five with me, i would quote it, but since i dont, i will paraphrase to the best of my memory: ... (in a time in the future) the united states was then balkanized so that it could never be a threat to global peace again...

[sin miedo]

Just to pose something, and maybe deimos or hawarameen could clarify (if they're still around):

I recently saw a documentary on Iraqi-Kurdistan (in northern Iraq). As you all know, they are in the no-fly-zone that the U.S. and Britain have placed on Iraq's northern and southern 1/3s (approximately). And you all know Bush's betrayal, telling the Kurds to rise against Saddam then abandoning and allowing them to be brutally slaughtered by Saddam's forces, and that this betrayal has left a bitter taste in the Iraqi Kurds' mouths. But, they are grateful for the U.S. and British warplanes that are basically the only thing keeping around 200,000 Iraqi soldiers from invading the North. They also are under the same sanctions and food for oil program that Iraq is under. But they (the Iraqi Kurds) are living in a full democracy, with an ever increasing standard of living. Most want justice to be done against Saddam, and claim that the U.S. and the world community isn't doing enough in bringing this man to justice. As long as Saddam is in power their prosperity is in constant jeapordy. And to add to that shadow, Al Queda has recently reared its ugly head in the region.

Is war the answer? I don't know, but I am not going to defend Saddam's dictatorship or his claim of sovereignty.




(Edited by sin miedo at 4:19 am on Jan. 10, 2003)

[CopperGoat]

When you are all hearing about how Iraq has weapons of "mass destruction" think twice and remember that U.S.A. has the most nuclear weapons in the world. And that Bush is just trying to finish what his daddy didn't. To have cheap crude oil from Iraq for the next 100 years. Iraq has 25% of the world's oil reserves. Oh, and remember the US has an oil pipeline in Afghanistan now, coincidence? Bush=Adolf Hitler. Going to war and killing innocent civilians for his own interest... Not to mention being prejudice and racist on some religions and races.

[elisabeth]

They can do almost everything, but not war against Iraq! For me, it's not the right way to put an end to the problems down there. Try it in a more peaceful way first!

[Invader Zim]

I recon its time to get rid of that despotic dictator, though why have a war to do it? Just give his opposition wepons and they will do it for the USA and have a revolution in the process.

[Doshka]

Ofcourse Bush has no right to attack Iraq! I am an arab, a Palestinian living in amman jordan. the arabs are not terrorists! the ape wouldnt know his ass from a hole in the wall. he wants war for many reasons...none of them being the ones he claims them to be. it is a fight for oil, power in this region, and a personal issue (his father, the first ape). the people who support this war on the bases of a change in the regeme are blind completely. cant you see that what Bush and his fucked up government will put in saddams place will be worst that what is there now?? and anyway what right does an american president or any president to decide that the people want and need a change in their government?? if they do than the people should revult. his war on terror is a complete joke...to begin with america was the only country in the history of the world to be labeled a terrorist state by the Criminal Court...he wants to fight terror? than take out a gun and shoot himself and do the world a favour

[Guardia Bolivariano]

Quote: from Doshka on 8:24 pm on Jan. 11, 2003
Ofcourse Bush has no right to attack Iraq! I am an arab, a Palestinian living in amman jordan. the arabs are not terrorists! the ape wouldnt know his ass from a hole in the wall. he wants war for many reasons...none of them being the ones he claims them to be. it is a fight for oil, power in this region, and a personal issue (his father, the first ape). the people who support this war on the bases of a change in the regeme are blind completely. cant you see that what Bush and his fucked up government will put in saddams place will be worst that what is there now?? and anyway what right does an american president or any president to decide that the people want and need a change in their government?? if they do than the people should revult. his war on terror is a complete joke...to begin with america was the only country in the history of the world to be labeled a terrorist state by the Criminal Court...he wants to fight terror? than take out a gun and shoot himself and do the world a favour

I totaly agree he justs wants oil for his war machines.