ATTN: Americans

[thegodfather]

So now we have Saddam...we here that he is making WMD's. He has a record of using chemical weapons, he will not allow the UN in to inspect, and refuse to cooperate on any level. So what do we do....wait until he attacks us....we did that already with AlQuida...people did not like that. So we make a decide not to wait until he has WMD's and decide to overthrow him. Now the issue is, "Iraq never attacked us." we must be there for the oil.

Iraq never had the capability to attack us even if they had a million WMD's. They had no delivery system, no possible way of attacking our homeland. In addition, Saddam was too pre-occupied with trying to invade his neighbors to waste any of his time on us. In fact, he dispised terrorists and frequently executed them. What really needs to be understood here, is that Congress is the only one authorized to send us into a war. Next, the only time that Congress may authorize a war is if the country in question poses a direct threat to our national security, which of course Iraq never did, that is a fact.

[damiongage]

Iraq never had the capability to attack us

Didn't we say the same about the Japanese prior to WWII?

even if they had a million WMD's. They had no delivery system,

So we should allow felons to buy and posses bullets as long as they do not have the gun?

no possible way of attacking our homeland. In addition, Saddam was too pre-occupied with trying to invade his neighbors to waste any of his time on us. In fact, he dispised terrorists and frequently executed them. What really needs to be understood here, is that Congress is the only one authorized to send us into a war. Next, the only time that Congress may authorize a war is if the country in question poses a direct threat to our national security, which of course Iraq never did, that is a fact.

Not so sure if it is a fact...but I respect it as your opinion. Alquida did not have any WMD's not a "delivery system" but they were able to attack us.

Look I am not trying to defend the war...But to say it was impossible for him to attack us, or have an impact in the Middle East that would greatly effect our way of life (yes oil) is silly.

[gixxerboy1]

Not so sure if it is a fact...but I respect it as your opinion. Alquida did not have any WMD's not a "delivery system" but they were able to attack us.

Look I am not trying to defend the war...But to say it was impossible for him to attack us, or have an impact in the Middle East that would greatly effect our way of life (yes oil) is silly.

but with that theory you can justify us attacking anyone we dont like. Also
Alquida is a broup we attacked and invaded a country

Also if thats enough reason for justify us attacking someone. What if another nation used that with US. Bush has made threats with NK and Iran. Should they attack us now?

[rockinred]

no,no, no... the threat was nuclear technology development... To monitor and control this is important to the world. when you have a country developing this and it refuses to act responsible and cooperate then the UN gets involved. This technology can be sold and given to terrorist groups, etc...

Still, even with this being the case, there are many ways to prevent this development without a full scale war. The war on Iraq was about different reasons that had nothing to do with this... but this is the real threat to the world and surrounding countries...not the development of war missles to attack the U.S. or anything you guys are talking about as a threat.

[gixxerboy1]

no,no, no... the threat was nuclear technology development... To monitor and control this is important to the world. when you have a country developing this and it refuses to act responsible and cooperate then the UN gets involved. This technology can be sold and given to terrorist groups, etc...

Still, even with this being the case, there are many ways to prevent this development without a full scale war. The war on Iraq was about different reasons that had nothing to do with this... but this is the real threat to the world and surrounding countries...not the development of war missles to attack the U.S. or anything you guys are talking about as a threat.

why not Iran Pakistan or North Korea then?

[rockinred]

why not Iran Pakistan or North Korea then?

true, the threat is prominent in different areas fore sure... which goes to support what I was saying..."this wasn't the real motive for the US war with Iraq".... All I was saying is that this REAL THREAT was being sold to the American public as the motive.... which is more hostile then terrorist attacks, etc... what was being mentioned above.

[gixxerboy1]

true, the threat is prominent in different areas fore sure... which goes to support what I was saying..."this wasn't the real motive for the US war with Iraq".... All I was saying is that this REAL THREAT was being sold to the American public as the motive.... which is more hostile then terrorist attacks, etc... what was being mentioned above.

Missunderstood you.

[nojoke]

no,no, no... the threat was nuclear technology development... To monitor and control this is important to the world. when you have a country developing this and it refuses to act responsible and cooperate then the UN gets involved. This technology can be sold and given to terrorist groups, etc...

Still, even with this being the case, there are many ways to prevent this development without a full scale war. but this is the real threat to the world and surrounding countries...

Good points indeed...Here are some tid bits of info regarding the International arms trade that occurs yearly...

1. International trading in arms is soaring beyond $1,000,000,000,000 each year, while hundreds of millions of humans are deprived of life's necessities...

2. Armaments appear to be a basic support of the world's economy...For example, on April 11, 1987, an article in London's Spectacle reported: "Counting only directly related industries, some 400,000 jobs are involved in the U.S. and 750,000 in Europe...

3. What's ironic about 1 and 2?...Interestingly enough, as the social and economic role of building weapons has grown, the actual question of whether the producers are well defended is a question of concern...Huh?...

You see, huge profits are made as bombs and other weaponry are traded all over the earth, even to potenital enemies...One needs to give this thought...Why?...Some day those bombs may come back in a fiery holocaust to destroy those selling them...Quiet the paradox!...

Now to add to this, in the United States alone, according to the Spectator, "every year the Pentagon inexplicably loses $900-million worth of arms and equipment"...

So then, in general, the world as a whole is in trouble...Peace!



NJ