Why does the US want to attack Iraq so badly.

chinups · 03-14-2003, 03:36 PM

Well if it wasn't for the US's army Canada would be up shit creek.

**Got Gear?** · 03-14-2003, 03:52 PM

Originally posted by chinups
Well if it wasn't for the US's army Canada would be up shit creek.

Sigh...
If you're gonna throw out a statement like that, you better have some countries in mind and some reasons why. Otherwise I'm going to accuse you of talking out of your ass.

***Pheedno*** · 03-14-2003, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by Got Gear?
Pheedno:

Send Korea a message? I don't think Iraq or any country should be the message. It's immoral. Send Korea a message directly, don't use Iraq as the notepad.

I'm not going to type out a list of all the sanctions in violation, and you're right I don't know them all.. there's alot of them. Here's a good website that lists most of them. Although it's almost 4 months outdated, it's pretty accurate. http://www.yonip.com/View%20Point/Bo...sages/121.html

I've reread your post a couple of times and I still cannot understand why you think Korea is such a different situation than that of Iraq. Maybe type it out short and directly for me, the ponts I did notice didn't seem to have any relevance. IE "It's not a UN country" and "They've always been crazy bastards" These sound more like similarities rather than differences.

I've seen media coverage showing hundreds if not thousands of Iraqi people protesting in the streets. If these are just fundamentalist groups, there's a whole shitload of people belonging to these groups.

Big Texan: I'm sorry, I shouldn't have labled all americans with that responce, you're correct. It's just frustrating, because whenever I get into this kind of debate I always get at least 1 american pop in with the "Well if it wasn't for the US's army Canada would be up shit creek" responce. And it's always untrue and irrelivant to the conversation anyway. Kinda gets frustrating after a while.

Iraq is not being used for a message, but the message is stated. it's kind of a secondary effect. I agree that a coutry should not be made an example of for the sole purpose of threatning another country. This is not the case. That point cannot be valid.

I've read through those violations and found one for demand of weapons seized by the U.N. and one for the call to stop a nuclear weapons program in pakistan and india. Those we're the only ones mentioning weapons. Now the nuclear threat of Pakistan and India is a serious consideration that will probably be dealt with later down the road. But Pakistan has a beef with India and vice versa. Pakistan is a self proclaimed ally of the U.S(allthough I think the proclamation is unsincere) and the threat from these countries on others is very minimal at this point in time. Whether they become a danger is a test of time.
While these resolutions and mandates violations have occured according to this website, none are near the severity of what we're dealing with in Iraq.

You have similarities between Iraq and N. Korea but the differences are this.
1. N. Korea will annihilate S. Korea if we attempt to stop their nuclear program and declare war on the U.S.-Iraq is pulling chase games and hide and seek to stall a war that they know is hopless for them. N. Korea actually thinks they will win.

2. N. Korea is much more dangerous than Iraq in terms of the International community but Iraq has been a long time in the works. Solve one problem at a time. N. Korea will be dealt with but engagin N. Korea at this time would send Americas already struggling economy to shit, it would indanger the lives of more citizens and soldiers for the plain fact that TWO(2) Wars are not exactly an easy think to coordinate.

Don't think N. Korea will be forgotten. It will be interesting seeing how this works out with the new finding that the U.N. is absolutely worthless. Now N. Korea is not a U.N. nation but power in numbers is just that. With the U.N. a joke, wich it is and Kim Jong knows that, I'm betting America will have to pony up the funds and soldiers to alleviate N. Koreas nuclear threat.

The thousands you see are paid by Saddam. I will not believe that the majority of his people support him in private. A public show of support guarantees your safety. It's not a free country over there. If an Iraqi troop catches a citizen burning an Iraqi flag and embracing an American one, what do you think will be the out come( I suddenly have a RATM song in my head)
Now I am not saying in the least bit that we are their favorite people. i even mentioned in the F-fries thread that I do not know they love us, but I do know they hate him. And I believe the majority would turn on him if they had an opportunity to do so. I'm guessing we'll see very soon.

**Got Gear?** · 03-14-2003, 04:13 PM

Thanks for the discussion Pheedno.

At this point I think we're splitting hairs and I don't think we're going to come to a conclusion. I'm going to let the topic drop unless you'd still like to debate this further. We're getting into speculation rather than fact and there's never any clear or correct answer when speculating/guessing.

Thanks! And I'm glad we were able to keep this civil dispite our wildly different views.

***Pheedno*** · 03-14-2003, 04:26 PM

Originally posted by Got Gear?
Thanks for the discussion Pheedno.

At this point I think we're splitting hairs and I don't think we're going to come to a conclusion. I'm going to let the topic drop unless you'd still like to debate this further. We're getting into speculation rather than fact and there's never any clear or correct answer when speculating/guessing.

Thanks! And I'm glad we were able to keep this civil dispite our wildly different views.

I'll agree with that.
Take care

**Terinox** · 03-14-2003, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by BIG TEXAN
Why not Korea???? Hello....we have how many troops and aircraft standing by just for this. Besides that if France and Germany don't want to help out with Iraq I say let them handle Korea! You know why Russia, Germany, and France doesn't want us to go to war with Iraq....well who sells Iraq their weapons.....Russia. Who sells Iraq their engines for the missiles and warheads......Germany. Who sell Iraq parts for their helicopters and jets......France. Hell Iraq is 20 something billion dollars in debt to France. If we go to war with Iraq do you think France will ever see a dime....hell no!

Although a valid claim, the U.S. has sold COUNTLESS weapons to both Iran and Iraq in the past (especially during the 80's) when Iraq invaded Iran. So don't make it sound like those other countries are only responsible for Iraq's possession of "weapons of mass destruction." It is the U.S. who gave many of the weapons and technologies which they are NOW trying to get rid of.

**Terinox** · 03-14-2003, 05:03 PM

Also Got Gear, these guys are right, you may see people on the streets burning flags and stuff like that, but the MAJORITY of the middle eastern citizens want NOTHING more then for the regime and the leadership to change. They just don't like the idea of 250,000 troops walking up and down their streets with machine guns hung around their shoulders. Although sometimes it does come down to that.

But like I said, it's not the bombing or killing of Saddam that will change anything. The problem lies at the root! There are COUNTLESS numbers of University students in Iran who constantly try to stirr up a revolution to change the regime. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, a simple thing as Iran getting into the WORLD CUP SOCCER Finals SCARES the Iranian government. They don't like the popularity, they don't like the media, they just want everything to be shut up!!!

If a PEACEFUL revolution could occur in Iran and other ME countries, my God, that place would TRULY be paradise to live/work in (for ME escapies).

**Madmax** · 03-14-2003, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by Got Gear?
..

MadMax: Typical american responce. Think about this for a second.. you really think that Canada is at risk if Iraq declares war on us? Lol.. you're a smart guy I'm sure you've figured it out already. Plus.. Iraq isn't going to attack us.. they don't have a major beef with Canada.

To All: Killing Saddam isn't going to be enough. There's many others who'd take his place and things would continue exactly as is. Think about it, if his government disliked him or his tactics they'd have gotten rid of him long ago.

what do you mean typical american response, when your country has the same kind of attack like our country did, then lets see how you guys feel..our country protects your country....

im not saying iraq is going to invade canada, im saying that our country keeps yours safe....if there was a threat on your country by another nation for any reason the U.S would come to your aid.

all im trying to say is unless your in our shoes than you dont have any right to tell us what to do....terrorists attacked our country, and they need to be punished, and if he threatens our counrty he needs to be murdered also...i would rather not see anyone murdered, but i would rather have it be a citizen of iraq than an american.......Madmax...

**Terinox** · 03-14-2003, 09:56 PM

Originally posted by Madmax

what do you mean typical american response, when your country has the same kind of attack like our country did, then lets see how you guys feel..our country protects your country....

im not saying iraq is going to invade canada, im saying that our country keeps yours safe....if there was a threat on your country by another nation for any reason the U.S would come to your aid.

all im trying to say is unless your in our shoes than you dont have any right to tell us what to do....terrorists attacked our country, and they need to be punished, and if he threatens our counrty he needs to be murdered also...i would rather not see anyone murdered, but i would rather have it be a citizen of iraq than an american.......Madmax...

Alright guys, calm down. Let's keep the North and South brothers happy

**jammergsxr** · 03-14-2003, 10:13 PM

I don't know guys something just doesn't sit right,Sounds like next week this whole shing ding will start the U.S. and U.K. is dead set on going in.But what kinda messes witn me is this,We have several thousand troups over there now much more than we had in 91 and the ground war didn't last as long as woodstock did.They have just called a couple of friends of mine to go who have been out for quite sometime.Calling reserves is normal but My friends are both in thier 30's one fought in desert storm the last time.My question is this what shit is gonna break off when we go in that we are not being told of,I'm telling you guys there is much more to this and they have to be ecspecting someone else,to justify calling this many troops in.I think we are all going to have one hell of a shock during this.I don't know what but something.I'm still all for this war and my friends are gung ho to go but the more I think about it the more I think this ones gonna be off the hook.

**Red Ketchup** · 03-14-2003, 10:48 PM

Jammer ... Just remember one thing here... the initial "Gulf War" was meant to be a clean war with no casualties on OUR side.

Air raids and other "low risk" missions (low risk my ass, but you see what I mean). Very little messy ground work. Had Bush daddy gone in and finished the job in the first place (thus probably having several hundred or thousand American kids come home in boxes) we would not even be talking about Irak today. But for whatever reason that did not happen. Bush daddy even tried to censor the medias so they would not report on American casualties until after the conflict...

Well, we're back at step one today. A messy ground war, army VS local gorillas. They'll have to take the country town by town, street by street. As I said before I really hope the Iraki army drop and runs when you guys go in, but what are the chances the zealots who form the gorilla factions will follow?

Dubyaw and his military brass aren't stupid. They realize that to win this one, they have to finish the job. They realize that's going to mean too many dead kids coming home in boxes. They also realize that this attack is going to set off all the crackpot anti-US terrorist cells around the planet that have been stewing for years and they're not just going to be burning flags.

Dealing with all that is going to require people... LOTS of people.

Whats next? Time will tell really...

I do think that now is the perfect time to go chat with granpas, dads or uncles who are veterans of WW1, WW2, Korea or Vietnam... see what they think of this. I value their opinions on warfare 5000% more than any bullshit spewed by politicians and medias.

Red

**jammergsxr** · 03-14-2003, 10:59 PM

I don't really know anynoe from the older bigger wars but I bet this is giving them an uneasy dejevou(however its spelled).I read that thousands of russia men was volenteering to go to Iraqs aid,yeah this ones gonna get messy!

***BIG TEXAN*** · 03-17-2003, 07:34 AM

Originally posted by Terinox

Although a valid claim, the U.S. has sold COUNTLESS weapons to both Iran and Iraq in the past (especially during the 80's) when Iraq invaded Iran. So don't make it sound like those other countries are only responsible for Iraq's possession of "weapons of mass destruction." It is the U.S. who gave many of the weapons and technologies which they are NOW trying to get rid of.

I'll give you that one. But for whatever reason people want to use, whether it's going in and getting rid of a tyrant, or cleaning up a mess we help create or whatever, this is something we need to do and do it quickly instead of giving him time to get his defenses all set up and ready!

**Animal Cracker** · 03-19-2003, 04:27 AM

Originally posted by Got Gear?
Seriously... what's going on guys? This isn't making sence at all!!
The official line is because Iraq is against UN sanctions regarding owning weapons of mass destruction and Sadam is dangerous.

Let me point out a few things that don't make sence to me.

1) The US has known about Sadam's weapons of mass destruction for decades. Yet this suddenly becomes a problem? Especially since he's been pretty good since the gulf war.

2) None of these weapons have the range to reach the US. And there's no way a 200lb (smallest weapon of mass destruction I know of) bomb is going to get smuggled into the country. So.. you're not really at risk. THe counties that are don't want to go to war or help you. Why not just say "Fuck it! A bomb lands on your head it's you own stupid fault then"

3) As far as I'm aware, no link has been found between Sadam and Al-Quida (or however it's spelt). No link has been found between Sadam and any terrorism!

Honestly... to the rest of the world, it looks like the US wants to go to war with Iraq for something that Iraq has had/been doing for decades without major US complaint. It looks like there's other motives involved.....

THIS IS MOST UNINFORMED, NAIEVE, THING THAT I HAVE READ ON THIS BOARD IN AWHILE. HOWEVER, STATEMENT 2) IS VERY TRUE AND I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU THERE. POINTS 1 AND 3 MUST HAVE BEEN FORMED BY WATCHING CNN/MTV FOR HOURS AT A SPELL. I WORK FOR NATO AND THERE ARE SHIT LOADS OF INFO/INTEL THAT AL-QAIDA HAS TRAINED IN IRAQ, RECIEVED MILITARY EQUIPMENT AND MONETARY ASSISTANCE FROM IRAQI ESTABLISHMENT...ALL LINKS.. (AS WELL AS IRAN AND SYRIA). SADAM HAS PAID $25 THOUSAND DOLLARS TO EACH OF THE FAMILIES OF PALESTINIAN SUICIDE BOMBERS(THIS IS DEFINATELY A LINK)...A TOXIC LIQUID, A RAW FORM OF A LIQUID NERVE AGENT THAT WHEN MIXED WITH AIR GIVES OFF A DEADLY GAS WAS PRODUCED IN AN IRAQI PHARMACUTICAL RESEARCH FACILITY( OH MY GOD...WAKE UP..A LINK ONCE AGAIN)

**El Kabong** · 03-19-2003, 07:46 AM

because bush is obsessed with carrying out a personal vendetta against hussein. avenging his daddy. and bush needs to divert attention from the facts that (a) he couldn't catch Bin Laden and (b) the economy sucks.

***Cycleon*** · 03-19-2003, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by El Kabong
because bush is obsessed with carrying out a personal vendetta against hussein. avenging his daddy. and bush needs to divert attention from the facts that (a) he couldn't catch Bin Laden and (b) the economy sucks.

come on - if you are going to state your opinion, please do it in a more educated fashion - that makes the dissenters look not only weak (which cant be helped) but stupid as well