[kasperl]

Originally posted by Zeronet


Your afraid he is pro-freedom? Hell, i'm pro-freedom too. I don't like dictators, its a personality flaw, i just cant seem to handle people who kill and torture innocent people.

it depends on what you call freedom.

[kasperl]

Originally posted by Liberator
Firstly, What everyone is forgetting is that we(America) ousted one of the world's most feared dictators.

It's done.  Don't whine and be a little ***** because you can sleep a little safer at night.

what was the real threat from Iraq? that it would turn of the oil tap? or that it would perhaps scream "we wan't the USA dead"?
as far as anybody can see now, there were no real nukes, and i still haven't seen complete, real, evidence. and by evidence i mean the nuke, or the gas, itself. and preferably without USA or Russia's markings still on it.

Secondly, if you're(the World Community) lucky, we'll let you in on the humanitarian side of reconstruction.  But if you think we're going to let you turn Iraq into another whiney, socialist joke of a country, you got another thing coming.

what exaclty do you mean by "whiney, socialist joke of a country"?

Thirdly, and this is directed more at Sandwich and his compatriots, Go Get Em'!  The people of Israel have lived in fear long enough and the only way it will end is with a total victory on one side or the other.  Not another ceasefire or land for peace deal, but honest, true, last man standing VICTORY!

so, if two groups of people have an argument, you put them in a cage, and tell them that they can't come out untill one side is totally dead?

Okay, now that my rant is over, these remarks are general, National level opinions.  I don't hold personal grudges unless their a complete bastard.

[Zeronet]

Originally posted by kasperl

what was the real threat from Iraq?
 

All countries ruled by dictators who gas/kill their own people are threats and should be invaded and replaced with a democratic government. Maybe just dictators in general, not really a fan of them. Too bad, assasinations by hitmen are frowned upon these days by democratic governments.

[kasperl]

Originally posted by Zeronet


All countries ruled by dictators who gas/kill their own people are threats and should be invaded and replaced with a democratic government.

Threats to who?

and by what right should you attack a country, by which you will unavoidably kill the people of that country, just to remove a leader YOU think tortures it people?

also, how do you define "kill their own people", whith having the death penalty, the US does that. and somehow i doubt that you would want the US to be "liberated".

[Zeronet]

Its a Threat to Democracy.

The world works on might, there ain't nothing the UN can do to America to stop it doing what it wants to do. International law is meaningless, only works on little tinpot countries, putting sanctions on the US would blow chunks out of the world economy, not to mention it could Veto them anyway. Although, the 2nd Gulf War was legal, because of 1441, the US had the right to inflict serious consequences upon Saddamn.

Every act has a price, but we have to do the greater good. By trying to save everyone, your going to save no-one. Though thousands of people died possibly died in the 2nd Gulf War, Saddamn was killing them by the hundred thousand a year, so it saves more people. Many US and UK troops gave their lives so Iraqi could enjoy life without Saddamn, things might not be perfect right now, but it'll improve, under Saddamn, it'd only get worse.

Really, your being pendantic, equating the US system of law, to using nerve gas on civilians is not smart or impressive debating.

Its in essense its being the worlds policeman, you lock up criminals because they commit crimes, so you kick out dictators because everyone deserves freedom.

[Woolie Wool]

Originally posted by Venom


Search for five minutes on the web. that centrifuge thinguy, I can order one today if I want. It's a tool that can be used for nukes crappadoo, but it's not the original purpose.
Anyway, of course he has the stuff. Hell, in 91, Bush senior sold nuke detonators to Saddam ( cool, heh, one year before invading it ), Mitterand sold pieces for nuke powerplants, etc etc. of course they have all that, everybody knows that already.
But there's no nuke, and that's all there is to know.

The Iraqis either destroyed the WMD before the US or UN could find them, or they smuggled them out, probably into Syria.

[Zeronet]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool


The Iraqis either destroyed the WMD before the US or UN could find them, or they smuggled them out, probably into Syria.

They probably buried them, a meter of dirt in the middle of the desert is a good way of hiding stuff.

[Woolie Wool]

Originally posted by Zeronet
Saddamn.

Good one, although I like to go whole hog and say "Sodamn Insame".

[kasperl]

Originally posted by Zeronet
Its a Threat to Democracy.

and who sais democracy is the one and only truth? what if some other country decides to be a monarchy, or perhaps an anarchy?

The world works on might, there ain't nothing the UN can do to America to stop it doing what it wants to do. International law is meaningless, only works on little tinpot countries, putting sanctions on the US would blow chunks out of the world economy, not to mention it could Veto them anyway. Although, the 2nd Gulf War was legal, because of 1441, the US had the right to inflict serious consequences upon Saddamn.

so your saying, that the US has a lot of power, and therefore the right to ignore everyone and do whatever it wants cause the rest can't hurt it?

Every act has a price, but we have to do the greater good. By trying to save everyone, your going to save no-one. Though thousands of people died possibly died in the 2nd Gulf War, Saddamn was killing them by the hundred thousand a year, so it saves more people. Many US and UK troops gave their lives so Iraqi could enjoy life without Saddamn, things might not be perfect right now, but it'll improve, under Saddamn, it'd only get worse.

i agree that Saddam wasn't good. but to be honest, war isn't the only way to get a leader of it's throne. and especially a war were you just invade another country. instead, the US could've waited for the UN to agree on attacking Iraq, which was not directly sanctioned by 1441, the only thing 1441 did was say that there would be consequences, which could mean anything. it didn't sanction a war.

Really, your being pendantic, equating the US system of law, to using nerve gas on civilians is not smart or impressive debating.

well, let's see, the US kills it's citizens if they have commited a crime, Saddam could say the same. the only difference is the definition of what a crime is.

Its in essense its being the worlds policeman, you lock up criminals because they commit crimes, so you kick out dictators because everyone deserves freedom.

and who gave the US the right to be the worlds policeman? what makes the USA better then any other country? and there is a great difference between locking a single person up, or attacking an entire country and it's people, and unevitably killing much of them.

[kasperl]

Originally posted by Zeronet


They probably buried them, a meter of dirt in the middle of the desert is a good way of hiding stuff.

ok, so you're saying that if you can't find them, nomatter what, he had 'em, but he hid them.

i think i can yell "THE USA AS AN UFO, ROSWELL WASN'T A WHEATER BALLOON, THERE COMING TO KILL US ALL" and have the same base as you.

[CP5670]

That Saddam looks somewhat comical with that cigar...

Whoop de doo  It doesn't imply any physical support was given to them. An offensive picture is hardly a good reason to invade a country.

Actually, you are quite right. But it hardly matters, because no reason from this is needed. A much better reason is that a shivan told Bush to do so in a dream. Case closed.

and by what right should you attack a country, by which you will unavoidably kill the people of that country, just to remove a leader YOU think tortures it people?

Ah, this old one again. Because the US has the power. That's where the right comes from. You seem to be denying that he tortured his people though. But anyway, that is the least important of reasons that anyone would go after him.

so your saying, that the US has a lot of power, and therefore the right to ignore everyone and do whatever it wants cause the rest can't hurt it?

Absolutely correct! You just figured that out?

ok, so you're saying that if you can't find them, nomatter what, he had 'em, but he hid them.

I think he is saying that whether or not we can find them has no bearing on whether or not he had them.

[Zeronet]

Originally posted by kasperl

and who sais democracy is the one and only truth? what if some other country decides to be a monarchy, or perhaps an anarchy?

so your saying, that the US has a lot of power, and therefore the right to ignore everyone and do whatever it wants cause the rest can't hurt it?

i agree that Saddam wasn't good. but to be honest, war isn't the only way to get a leader of it's throne. and especially a war were you just invade another country. instead, the US could've waited for the UN to agree on attacking Iraq, which was not directly sanctioned by 1441, the only thing 1441 did was say that there would be consequences, which could mean anything. it didn't sanction a war.

well, let's see, the US kills it's citizens if they have commited a crime, Saddam could say the same. the only difference is the definition of what a crime is.


and who gave the US the right to be the worlds policeman? what makes the USA better then any other country? and there is a great difference between locking a single person up, or attacking an entire country and it's people, and unevitably killing much of them.

I'll simplify it.

Might makes right. I fight for what i believe in, not what others believe in. I don't care what Saddamn says, im intelligent enough to know the difference between nerve gassing kurds and executing a serial killer. Also i never said the US was better than every other country, it has the best economy and military, but that doesn't make it the "best", i never said criminals and war were the same, only that parallels existed, which is true, bad men do bad things, so we kick their ass.

You see, i dont give a damn if you(not you personally Kasp, just anybody) believe torturing people is a good thing, or if you think killing people is a good thing, i'll do everything in my power to stop it. I don't care if you think dictatorships are better, i don't, so i'll do everything in my power to make sure dictators lose power. In the end, its about what i believe is right, if you don't believe what i think is right, then leave it at that, its fine.

[CP5670]

Well said. People will do what they want, not what others want.

[Nico]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool


The Iraqis either destroyed the WMD before the US or UN could find them, or they smuggled them out, probably into Syria.

didn't know you were from the CIA.
I say: they don't have nukes and never had any. what makes you more right than me? nothing, since you have no proofs. you know, that's in your laws: all suspects are regarded as inocent until evidences against them have been found, or something in those lines. It doesn't work for strangers?

Anyway, right now, what I see is that US presence on Iraki ground is a threat for the balance of this area. That's just one big mess.

Regardless, that's one of those threads that have absolutly nothing to do here. Could an admin lock that? the little show over the An0n's case seems really pointless, when I see that kind of thread appearing right after .

[CP5670]

Well I say they may or may not have them (and that it does not matter either way), so I am the most right, because I cannot be wrong while you can. As for the laws, that's exactly the case; the laws of a nation only apply to its own citizens.

[kasperl]

Originally posted by Zeronet

I'll simplify it.

Might makes right. I fight for what i believe in, not what others believe in.

so if i follow that philosophy, an dictator who is leading the most powerfull country in the world is right and has the roight to kill, rape, torture, extort or just do antyhing he wants to the entire world population.

I don't care what Saddamn says, im intelligent enough to know the difference between nerve gassing kurds and executing a serial killer. Also i never said the US was better than every other country, it has the best economy and military, but that doesn't make it the "best", i never said criminals and war were the same, only that parallels existed, which is true, bad men do bad things, so we kick their ass.

mmm, right, what did the Iraq populace do to deserve a US military dictatorship instead of Saddam?

You see, i dont give a damn if you(not you personally Kasp, just anybody) believe torturing people is a good thing, or if you think killing people is a good thing,

i never saids that those were good things, i only asked whgat right you had to act for others, while those others never asked you anything.

i'll do everything in my power to stop it. I don't care if you think dictatorships are better, i don't, so i'll do everything in my power to make sure dictators lose power. In the end, its about what i believe is right, if you don't believe what i think is right, then leave it at that, its fine.

[CP5670]

if i follow that philosophy, an dictator who is leading the most powerfull country in the world is right and has the roight to kill, rape, torture, extort or just do antyhing he wants to the entire world population.

Of course, and that is exactly what would happen in such a case, unless someone else can stop him, which they also have the right to do. Think about it for a moment, what defines this "right" anyway other than capability?

[kasperl]

Originally posted by CP5670


Of course, and that is exactly what would happen in such a case, unless someone else can stop him, which they also have the right to do. Think about it for a moment, what defines this "right" anyway other than capability?

ok, so if i run out into the street, and shoot everybody i see, i am right because i could do it?

if i come up to your house, rape your mother and sister (if you have one) in front of your eyes, then kill your entire family, and the torture and kill you, i am right because i could do it?

[CP5670]

ok, so if i run out into the street, and shoot everybody i see, i am right because i could do it?

if i come up to your house, rape your mother and sister (if you have one) in front of your eyes, then kill your entire family, and the torture and kill you, i am right because i could do it?

Absolutely. I mean, who am I to say that you are not so? Whether or not I would like it and whether I would try to stand in your way is a different issue, but you certainly have the right. And I don't have a sister.

[kasperl]

Originally posted by CP5670


Absolutely. I mean, who am I to say that you are not so? Whether or not I would like it and whether I would try to stand in your way is a different issue, but you certainly have the right. And I don't have a sister.

interesting philosophy.

i still believe however that no-one, should interfere with someone else, unless that someone has asked (i mean verbally, or written, not just by being a dick). nomatter how powerfull either one is.

i believe that would be real freedom, and i don't believe attacking other country's with a different ideology is.