[CP5670]

no it should be this way because I say so, and my idea of what should be is better than yours, so you suck! ph34r!

[Kamikaze]

No, you're wrong and you know it 'cause I have uber-missles! *boom*

[CP5670]

only problem is, that could have gone in any direction.

I say you should be dead! therefore, you are dead! because my should's are better than anyone else's!

[kasperl]

ok, i've read the thread, but i'm not gonna respond to everyone individually, because that's going to get a bit to complicated.

IMHO these are the reasons for Bush going to war:

1) to distract is citizens from the failing US economy
2) to get some oil in the proces
3) to make it look like he's actually doing something
4) because is nice advisors told him to do so.

actually, i doubt that Bush knows what he's doing, because in the process of killing a lot of people in Iraq, he and Blair are slowly tearing the UN down.

i have a lot of debates about this subject at school, but those don't go well because of my friends, who constantly yell i'm pro-iraq, while i'm just against what Bush is doing right now. so i'm pretty relieved if i can talk about this in a civilized manner now.

[Razor]

Originally posted by Bobboau
well how would you rather we did it,
more international suport?

My choice: Not American (meh, everyone knows my nationality here) and should NOT do it.

You have to realize that Iraq will not attack you (first) that easely because you would of course (logically said) attack back but however, if you attack first they are certenly gonna strike back. Don't think they wouldn't because that's where you fail.

Conclusion: Forget about everything and mind your own buisness and replace Bush as soon as possible. His politics will certenly either destroy America and it's people or even start a new world war. Don't you see? He doesn't have any decent respect for UN or it's security council. He ignores the opiniopn of majority. He doesn't care about you, (not really ) he only does things that are in his own interess (power) and...he acts as well (if you know what I mean).

[Bobboau]

I fully expect an Iraqi counter atack, and on our soil, I am still in suport for the war becase it is only going to get worse.

you know if we had any people going for the war that were running against the presedent, I think I would vote for them.
I have never denied that bush is an idiot.
(BTW 60% of Americans are in favor of the war without UN approval, so he isn't ignoring the majority of the people he is representing)

[Styxx]

I should close it, but I won't, because you people are funny when you pretend to know something.

[Tiara]

Originally posted by Styxx
I should close it, but I won't, because you people are funny when you pretend to know something.

agreed

Ow, and I won't make a Pro/anti war statement. But Bobbau, ignoring 40% of the American populous isn't too smart. Its not like America has 10k inhabitants.

[Warlock]

Originally posted by Tiara


agreed

Ow, and I won't make a Pro/anti war statement. But Bobbau, ignoring 40% of the American populous isn't too smart. Its not like America has 10k inhabitants.

http://www.census.gov/

 290,466,961 by last check.

[Sandwich]

Sorry Bob, I just had to add a poll option for myself.

[Tiara]

So, he's "ignoring" 116,186,784 Americans... Very smart. He should have a limit at like 10-15% opposition when it comes to something this big.

If he goes through with it, he might lose more then his allies.

but MEH! I couldn't give a rats ass. He does what he does. If it comes back to bite him in the ass I';ll be sitting here, laughing at him.

[Razor]

Originally posted by Styxx
I should close it, but I won't, because you people are funny when you pretend to know something.

Yes children listen to elders because they know stuff.

(BTW 60% of Americans are in favor of the war without UN approval, so he isn't ignoring the majority of the people he is representing)

Welll then go for it. Why the heck do you need international support when you can do it yourself eh?

I would just love to see the UN make an example of the US if Bush would pull this off.

[Warlock]

www.cnn.com

POLL FINDINGS
Percent of respondents who are certain that Iraq ...

Is hiding evidence:        66

Is obstructing inspectors:   57

Has bio/chemical weapons:   56

Has weapons facilities:   55

Is seeking nuclear weapons:   47

Has ties to Osama bin Laden:  39

Source: CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll

President Bush's approval rating remains at 61 percent

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/10/sprj.irq.iraq.poll/index.html

hmmm

[Razor]

Originally posted by Tiara
So, he's "ignoring" 116,186,784 Americans... Very smart. He should have a limit at like 10-15% opposition when it comes to something this big.

If he goes through with it, he might lose more then his allies.

but MEH! I couldn't give a rats ass. He does what he does. If it comes back to bite him in the ass I';ll be sitting here, laughing at him.

If he goes through with it, he might lose more then his allies.

True True Very true. But I don't think he would care. Hey who needs allies when he can always push Da Red Button™ if they oppose him.

If it comes back to bite him in the ass I';ll be sitting here, laughing at him.

Believe me, I would laugh at him as well.

[Razor]

Originally posted by Stealth
that's all crap.

Iraq has done nothing to us, and suddenly the United States gets involved with them.  doesn't that seem a little suspicious?

Sure, we're "peace-makers"... doesn't that seem a little pathetic that we're doing something to Iraq, when much worse things have been going on with the United States knowing about them for years and years without the US doing anything.


America says "but they have weapons of mass destruction".
Everyone says "but so do you, so does Korea, so does Britain, so does Russia and a handful of other countries, why can't they?"
America says "two reasons:  
1) They were not authorized to have them
2) They'll use them against us
Everyone else says "
1) So who the hell "authorizes" countries to be allowed to carry nuclear weapons?  Who "authorized" the US to be able to produce them?  God?  hell no...
2) America has no room to talk.  America is the only country in the world to have used nuclear weapons / weapons of mass destruction against anyone.  the only country.  if anything, they should be the ones not allowed to have them.

That's what i think

Genius! Absolute genius.
I agree absolutely with everything Stealth said. If anyone should be dissarmed that would be the USA. USA does also have nuclear, chemical, biological weapons and other weapons of mass destruction (see you tested a new bomb in florida). I absolutely aprove Korea's weapons development because they need to deffend themselves from USA if they are attacked in any case. So what will it be? (US + weapons of mass destruction) - weapons of mass destruction = peace ;9

[Warlock]

Yea he's right,...we're known for using WMDs on our own ppl,......quiote often even.

*shrugs*

Anyways not like a damn thing anyone in here says really makes a diff.

[Tiara]

Originally posted by Razor

True True Very true. But I don't think he would care. Hey who needs allies when he can always push Da Red Button™ if they oppose him.

Well, I doubt he'll push it when 100+ million American go against him...

On second thought...

[Dan1]

How many people have actually been to the Middle East?  It's easy to say..."oh bush is just after oil ..etc" sitting from your computer and just reading polls off of websites etc.  Try visiting the region sometime, visit a Kurdish (  hope i spelled it right) town sometime.  Or try going to one of their prisons and tell the people inside that you want to wait longer becasue you don't know if it's right.   Also consider that the reason america has "waited " as it were is because that EVIL  Clinton was in power for eight years.   Just food for thought..

(Lobs bomb at Bobboau from Edwardsville;7    j/k)

[Bobboau]

what the.. someone ****ed with the... Sandvich!!!!
well Styxx, if you must close it would you be able to keep the poll open?

you know there is a reason why some contries have UN demands that they disarm, and many others don't
like the USA; France, UK, Russa, hell even China have nukes and nobody has asked them to get rid of them, out of this groupe only the UK can be considered a real allie of America (I'm not makeing a stink with the French, they simply arn't part of the military part of NATO), China is (as has been said) the greatest single military threat to America, and Russa doesn't exactly have the frendliest history with us ether, especaly when it comes to nukes.
but I think the only thing that we need is to prove that they haven't dismantled there biological chemical and (not or) Nucular weapons, becase that is the demand of our little cecefire agreement, and if they don't live up to there end we shouldn't live up to ours. whether we have other reasons for going over there in addition to that is irrelevent

[diamondgeezer]

Titbit of information for you:

For the last two or three months, the daily poll on Sky News has concerned Iraq, at least five days a week. The questions are variations on the themes of 'should we have a war', 'do you trust Saddam', 'does Saddam have weapons of mass destruction', 'should Saddam be given more time' - that kind of thing.

Every single time, the result favours removing Saddam the way the Americans want to do buisness, and sooner rather than later. It varies between a mjority of only a few percent to an almost total agreement, but the message is clear - the people voting want shot of Saddam right now. OK, it's not the most scientific of population samples, but I've yet to see one of their polls say no to war.

I can only imagine that whilst the peacenicks are out protesting, the pro-war guys are staying at home an voting on their TV...