Why can't we search the Palaces? (By Capitalist Imperial) -

[Guest]

Well, we've reached an agreement that is benign for Iraq at best!

Stupid U.N

why are we even going to bother?

it is obvious why we can't go to any of saddams numerous palaces, or his military headquarters, or to republican guard facilities

because he is hiding things there

why would he restrict us to more than 12 square miles of territory? thats a lot of space. he didn't ask for privacy at one house, but in numerous compunds capable of housing all necessary materials of WMD's

wake up,leftists, put down the granola, and concede that saddams shenanigans are intended to hide weapons for malicious use

this is far from over

[canikickit]

The senate act, section 307, stipulates that "the President may deny a request to inspect any facility in the United States in cases where the President determines that the inspection may pose a threat to the national security interests of the united states".

Of course, by no means should this apply to any nation other than the US. Because they are the richest. Yes.

Double standard anyone? Can you say hypocrisy?

[suffianr]

Why worry about the hidden ones? What's 12 suqare miles of palace courtyards against mobility and sheer expanse of the desert?

Iraqi mobile missle launchers, mostly Scuds, are the ones your government should be worried about. They can be configured to carry chemical, biological and nuclear warheads.

Don't worry about the ones hidden away in palace bunkers...you'll get them. Isn't that what carpet bombing was invented for? Isn't your government planning to annihilate Baghdad eventually?

[peaccenicked]

There's No Connection Between Inspections and Sanctions on Iraq. Equally no Nation can "prove" a negative, that it's not doing something. Biological and chemical weapons can be made, "in a large closet which is all the space you need to mix deadly chemical weapons... Chemical and biological weapons are the great equalizers against our atomic weapons." (Time "Everyman a Superpower", 11/24/97).
From 8 washington lies about Iraq

[Stormin Norman]

We can't search those areas because it would be unfair to Saddam. How would you feel if someone invaded your privacy like that? He has rights too, you know. What are we barbarians? When did self preservation come before the rights of a dictator? Let's just stop this charade and go back to the economy, stupid. When can we get back to the illusion of everlasting peace that enabled are military and intelligence capabilities to degrade to such a point? When can I go back to worrying about the safety of my SUV and gay rights? When can I get back to smoking my crack and not giving a shit about the prosperity of my nation? When will Prozac and Viagra be brought back to the forefront of the debate. Why must we concern ourselves with the threat posed by fanatics, instead of enabling the growing population of degenerates living in the streets? When will I get everything from my housing to my medical care payed for by the government? Will it be long before we can go back to the era of hyphenated Americans and politically correctness?

Oh yeah, some of use never batted an eye and are still concerned about these trivial matters. I fear that popular opinion and this generations lack of fortitude has doomed us to be conquered by our enemies, but I know people exist that care about that which is truly important. Those who will fight and die to bring left wing subhumans, like the ones encountered on this board, the right to talk seditiously and engage in treason.

Times they are a changing. One can only hope that the kind of nonsense that was previously thought of as important will be left behind, as we mature into the kind of men and women that helped defeat Hitler during WWII. This isn't Vietnam, and the hippy mentality should not be tolerated by those who value their lives. Be carefull of the type of bullshit that you find important, for oneday you could wake up dead or speaking a foriegn language. I honestly don't know which is worse.

[canikickit]

Idiots shouldn't be allowed to quote Bob Dylan.

[guerrillaradio]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 11:24 am on Oct. 3, 2002
...oneday you could wake up dead or speaking a foriegn language. I honestly don't know which is worse.

LOL...typical Moron national supremacist bullshit. I can't take you seriously with comments such as the above.

[Guest]

My original question has yet to be answered directly.

Capitalist Imperial

[canikickit]

I don't see why anybody would have their arsenal in storage in their bedroom, or anywhere near there private home. Do you think somebody would? Or do you think they moved everything there in the last few days?

It also is to do with the fact that the US wants to go to war regardless of the results of the searches, so why would he let them see these areas, when what they see could be used against him?

Also refer to my earlier reply, I don't think Bush would allow the Pentagon or White House to be examined, if tables were reversed.

[peaccenicked]

''.Equally no Nation can "prove" a negative, ''

Blind war mongering idiots. Answer that.

[El Che]

Bullies need to be spanked.

[Hattori Hanzo]

ok, listen up, Saddam's home will be burned! the US will invade! its Bush, ok? he's too stubborn to listen

[Robin Hood]

First: Actually the US should search through the whole country thats including the palaces. Not that they will find anything specific there, maybe some torture chambers or whatever Sadams degenerate mind has come up with. Romanias former dictator..cant spell his name, had a nice porno collection and was bathing in luxuries while his people starved. So much for being a socialist...

For Capitalist Imperial...shouldnt that be Capitalist Imperialist?
Else, whats with your fascination with war? You sure sound like some brat who never been in a firefight or been in a scene of battle. Can tell you that is one thing that Im glad to be doing paperwork for and never again put my foot in one.
You dont seem to give a darn thought that american guys are going to die there, its not like in 50s movie when everyone gets hit in the chest and die. Specially not with US superior medical resources that can keep guys alive with torsos half blown off or horrific unrepearable burns. Its sickening to see guys with injuries that will leave them like monsters, screaming for help and a medic patching them up when they should just pull the plug on them. One can wonder if it was all worth to secure some oil resources.
For those US servicemen who died and got injured in Afghanistan, was it worth it? Women are still opressed. Lunatics are still ruling the country. Opium is still main export. Terrorists still based there.
So war, no thanks, not for anything.
If so, to end all wars.
Heck, degenerate capitalists should be executed for even supporting war. If they so much want it, why dont they go themselves. Let me see Bush in a trench right in a lovely firefight and Ill be right behind him.

And else, as for democracy. Can someone please get Bush to invade Saudi Arabia? Nice country and nice people but with a regime that supports terrorism quite so openly and cant spell democracy even if they wanted to.
But heck, today Iraq tomorrow some other third world country.

[Xvall]

Hey CI... Do you have weapons of mass destruction? I think you do! I don't care if you say you don't, of I have no evidence other than old CNN video footage to prove that you do! I think you have weapons of mass destruction! Let me dig up your front lawn, and your back lawn too! While we're at it, let me search your garrage, and your house; and go through all the drawers in your room! You don't want me to? Why not, what are you hiding?

[RedCeltic]

Well, I don't know if CI does but I'll tell you one thing,

The U.S. is so worried that Iraq may have "Weapons of Mass Destruction" yet talk little of the treat of nuclear warheads from numerous other sources!

The thing is, since the 1980's the number of counteries that
have the ability to manufacture and transport nuclear
warheads has grown dramaticly. Today, it's not only the US, Russia, China, UK, and France that have Nuclear warheads, but also former soviet republics, (Ukrane, Kazakhastan,Ubekistan,Georgia) Israel,India,Pakastan,South Africa.

Those are the nations that have been deemed to already have nuclear warheads. In adition, seven more nations have been said to have nuclear programs:

Argentina,Brazil,Iran,Libya,North Koria,Taiwan,....and Iraq

Finally, vertually all nations with developed economies have the technology to develop nuclear weapons and delivery systems but have chosen not to manufacture them. These are (among others) Canada, Most of eastern and western Europe (besides UK and France) New Zealand, South Koria, Australia.

So with all these "Weapons of mass destruction" and the technology to manufacture them floating around the world....

tell me again why do we need to bomb Iraq?

[Stormin Norman]

Red Celtic,

I believe Bush addressed your specific question in last night's speech to the nation. He specifically distinguished Iraq from these other nuclear powers that you mentioned. Those other nations have yet to aggressively attack their neighbors, lose a war, and violate the terms of the treaty. What about this distinction is so hard for you commies to understand? How can you not see a need to nuetralize this threat? For all the talk of democracy that you guys do, it appears that you are all too excited to defend a murderous dictator from forced removal.

What is wrong with us war mongers? Let's turn the question around. What is wrong with you peace loving, wannabe hippies? Are you suicidal? Of course you are, because suicide is for the weak.

[RedCeltic]

SN:

It would be one thing if Iraq had done something recently to warrent an attack by the United States, but to use the excuse that Iraq was agressive over ten years ago just doesn't hold up.

Is Saddam a murderous dictator? Yes

IS Saddam any more of a muderous dictator in 2002 than he was in say 1995? No. Perhaps you forget how bady he was defeated in 1991, I seriously doubt he has and doubt he's eager to relive the experience.

[Solzhenitsyn]

Red Celtic,
You're wrong about the FSR's having nukes. They all agreed to either destroy their stockpiles or turn them over to Russia.

I agree with you're assessment that nukes were a Pandora's box of evil. The knowledge to build an A- bomb is fairly easy to obtain. It's the Maxim Machine Gun Principle of Armaments.