PDA

View Full Version : Attack Iraq?


<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 11:46 AM
Being that all the swampies are from different parts of the world, what are your views on the developing crisis with Iraq? For those politically consciencous swampies, what do u think. Personally I think Sadaam is a threat and should be attacked. Is anyone not from a UN countrty? Ok this thread should just be like a global war views thread. What do u think?

C'jais
11-20-2002, 11:49 AM
Saddam is an assumed threat yes, but so is the USA.

If USA starts the attack, they'll look like the ones who started WW3, not Irak.

Irak cannot assume world superiority by attacking anything, USA can.

<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 11:54 AM
I agree, but the USA shouldnt wait for a nuclear attack to begin combat, if the weapons inspection shows that they may be hiding advanced weapons, Id make the first move and take out Sadaam

Darklighter
11-20-2002, 11:56 AM
That is exactly what I was going to say Jais. If we do not provoke Iraq, will a war necessarily start? By attacking them there is a very likely chance they will retaliate, then we will retaliate, and so on and so on...suddenly, we are the ones who have started the war (by 'we', I mean those who are not on Iraq's side). I say we do nothing. And if it comes down to it that we need to fight, so be it.

<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 11:59 AM
yeah, i agree w/ u guys

-s/<itzo-
11-20-2002, 12:02 PM
WAR ooh agh, what is it good for absolutely nothing.

you ever heard that song...



but i totally agree with you guys. we need to stop this corruption going on the world.

C'jais
11-20-2002, 12:03 PM
Me and some friends have talked about something:

If USA joined hands with Europe, we could assume world domination, and dictate the human rights on other, less civilized countries.

Just an idea :rolleyes:

Mex
11-20-2002, 12:10 PM
I think that the USA, should get a nuclear weapon, find saddam, launch missle, :waive1: bye bye war! :clap2:

C'jais
11-20-2002, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by Abarath
should get a nuclear weapon - bye bye war!

USA is far more dangerous than Irak in regards to weapon arsenals.

What war? There's no war happening right now between USA and Irak - OTOH, USA might suddenly find themselves in a globe spanning world war if they eradicate Saddam like that.

ckcsaber
11-20-2002, 12:12 PM
I think that the USA, should get a nuclear weapon, find saddam, launch missle, bye bye war!

Oh yes, its so much easier to decide on things without thinking of the consequences:rolleyes:

<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 12:15 PM
Jais, I like ur idea, except the US would have no interest in being a global bully and attacking smaller countries. Some of those smaller countries are our allies. However, if NATO (US, Canada, Mexico for those who dont know) joined forces w/ Europe, we could be very sucessful in utilizing resources from weak counties (beating up on Kuwait for their oil) that sort of thing. But, both nations dont want that kind of iamge so I doubt it would happen,

interesting though...

on another note, has flanders changed his name to abarath?

Mex
11-20-2002, 12:16 PM
Err, Yes this is my new name [I was flanders]

And hmm I shouldve thinked about what would happen if USA fired a missile.......

I'll think later :D

Chewbacco
11-20-2002, 12:17 PM
I am an American and president Bush demanded any chemical weapons to be destroyed. We are trying to not go to war. But if it get too big of a threat we have no choice. Better risk thousands (army) than millions of lives.(civillians):)

<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by Abarath
I think that the USA, should get a nuclear weapon, find saddam, launch missle, :waive1: bye bye war! :clap2:

jais is right, there is no war. But in regards to how dangerous the US is, I think we have the weaponry to be dangerous, but Iraq's intentions are far more evil. Even though we have more weaponry, they could easily formulate a cheap shot plan to kill a good amount of citizens

C'jais
11-20-2002, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Darth Strom
Jais, I like ur idea, except the US would have no interest in being a global bully and attacking smaller countries. Some of those smaller countries are our allies. However, if NATO (US, Canada, Mexico for those who dont know) joined forces w/ Europe, we could be very sucessful in utilizing resources from weak counties (beating up on Kuwait for their oil) that sort of thing. But, both nations dont want that kind of iamge so I doubt it would happen,


Oh, I'm not saying that we should or that we have interest in doing this - I'm just pointing out that combined, all "western" civilizations together could dominate the world easily, as of right now.

I'm fearing that USA simply might be the greater threat to world peace than Irak, indirectly, of course.

<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by Chewbacco
I am an American and president Bush demanded any chemical weapons to be destroyed. We are trying to not go to war. But if it get too big of a threat we have no choice. Better risk thousands (army) than millions of lives.(civillians):)

I very much agree, the USA isnt trying to bully anyone, but if Iraq becomes enough of a threat we should act on em'

<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by Cjais


Oh, I'm not saying that we should or that we have interest in doing this - I'm just pointing out that combined, all "western" civilizations together could dominate the world easily, as of right now.



Interesting...

PhantomHelix
11-20-2002, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by Cjais
Me and some friends have talked about something:

If USA joined hands with Europe, we could assume world domination, and dictate the human rights on other, less civilized countries.

Just an idea :rolleyes:

yeah, we would do that, but for some reason the french HATE us and we HATE them.....go figure.

anywho, they shouldnt start anything yet. if the tests turn up weapons, isolate these and destroy them without any loss of life. if saddam starts to attack us with weapons, we gotta take him out. there would be no other option if he kills people.

<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by PhantomHelix


yeah, we would do that, but for some reason the french HATE us and we HATE them.....go figure.

anywho, they shouldnt start anything yet. if the tests turn up weapons, isolate these and destroy them without any loss of life. if saddam starts to attack us with weapons, we gotta take him out. there would be no other option if he kills people.

How could he attack if we destroyed his weapons?

~

PhantomHelix
11-20-2002, 12:34 PM
no, im saying if he attacks with weapons before we find them......not after. besides, even if they look their best, he will still hide some. its inevitable.

Taos
11-20-2002, 01:31 PM
This whole topic makes me very nervous. Like has been said....I'm afraid of WW3 starting if we go in and invade Iraq. :(

I know that's not what anybody wants (ww3).....but it sure looks like it's gonna come down to that. All I know is Gee Dubya better have some awfully good intellegence on Iraq to consider a decision like this. I mean they better have difinitive proof. But just going in there to clean up the mess that his Dad left.....isn't the reason to go.

For me, I want to have Osama finished off first before we do anything against Iraq. Unless, that info that the Bush Admin has is saying we need to move quickly. I just really want to get rid of Osama in the worst way.

Elijah
11-20-2002, 01:39 PM
You all talk about how we may start WW3 and what not... Do you have any idea how many people die to the hand of Saddam EACH DAY? DO YOU!? A terrorist like him needs to and must be destroyed.

Its a lot like the Bin laden thing... people say we didnít need to attack him blah blah blah, try keeping your cool after having thousands of your country men/women killed by some guy who doesnít like you because you have religious freedom.

my answer is simple: Yes.

Pad
11-20-2002, 01:55 PM
iraq a threat to go to war? NO

bush a threat to the world? YES

thats all i have to say in this debate as it makes me really angry

Kstar__2
11-20-2002, 02:04 PM
i do think that saddam is bad, but i don't think they should attack iraq for it, it's a bit complicated. but they sould try to only kill saddam

<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by Leemu Taos
This whole topic makes me very nervous. Like has been said....I'm afraid of WW3 starting if we go in and invade Iraq. :(

I know that's not what anybody wants (ww3).....but it sure looks like it's gonna come down to that. All I know is Gee Dubya better have some awfully good intellegence on Iraq to consider a decision like this. I mean they better have difinitive proof. But just going in there to clean up the mess that his Dad left.....isn't the reason to go.

For me, I want to have Osama finished off first before we do anything against Iraq. Unless, that info that the Bush Admin has is saying we need to move quickly. I just really want to get rid of Osama in the worst way.

I totally agree man, well said
~

Inky Binky
11-20-2002, 02:22 PM
A few points:

1) First of all, there aint gonna be no WW3. If it comes down to it and we have to go to war with IRAQ, then ts gonna be something like Desert Storm, maybe a little smaller considering there won't be too many allies with us this time. Yes people will die. In war, that usually happens.

2) IRAQ is a threat to world stability. We're living in a dangerous time now. The fact that more and more countries are able to develop their own nuclear bombs (or are in the process of developing) is a testament to this fact. Look at INDIA and PAKISTAN. These 2 countries recently added nuclear weaponry to their arsenals and what do they do? They still creat conflict among themselves. Its a very real possibility that the first nuclear war will be between these 2 childish countries. As for IRAQ, we're not gonna fight them 'cause we think they're gonna launch a bunch of nucelar missles at us. What we're worried about is if Saddam Hussein manages to make nuclear weapons, there's a pretty good possibility he will give the know how, the resources, the expertise, and yes maybe an actual bomb to terrorists groups or states. Stopping him from doing this won't solve the whole problem 'cause there are others doing the same thing. But if you take him out of the equation (kill him or arrest him), well thats one "less" problem to worry about.

3) There is no doubt in my mind that the U.S. or "another" Western Country is gonna suffer from a nuclear attack from a terrrorist group at some point in the future. This is inevitable. Eventually, a terrorist group is gonna get their hands on "the bomb" and use it. It could happen a year from now, 5 years from now or maybe it will happen 30 years from now. Bottomline is, it "is" gonna happen.

I only wish the world would just look at things realistically or with an open mind. There's quite a few countries that have an unrealistic view of the world. Problems do not go away if you leave it alone. There are times when you have to take action. Sadly, at times, violent action.

Elijah
11-20-2002, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by Inky Binky
A few points:

1) First of all, there aint gonna be no WW3. If it comes down to it and we have to go to war with IRAQ, then ts gonna be something like Desert Storm, maybe a little smaller considering there won't be too many allies with us this time. Yes people will die. In war, that usually happens.

2) IRAQ is a threat to world stability. We're living in a dangerous time now. The fact that more and more countries are able to develop their own nuclear bombs (or are in the process of developing) is a testament to this fact. Look at INDIA and PAKISTAN. These 2 countries recently added nuclear weaponry to their arsenals and what do they do? They still creat conflict among themselves. Its a very real possibility that the first nuclear war will be between these 2 childish countries. As for IRAQ, we're not gonna fight them 'cause we think they're gonna launch a bunch of nucelar missles at us. What we're worried about is if Saddam Hussein manages to make nuclear weapons, there's a pretty good possibility he will give the know how, the resources, the expertise, and yes maybe an actual bomb to terrorists groups or states. Stopping him from doing this won't solve the whole problem 'cause there are others doing the same thing. But if you take him out of the equation (kill him or arrest him), well thats one "less" problem to worry about.

3) There is no doubt in my mind that the U.S. or "another" Western Country is gonna suffer from a nuclear attack from a terrrorist group at some point in the future. This is inevitable. Eventually, a terrorist group is gonna get their hands on "the bomb" and use it. It could happen a year from now, 5 years from now or maybe it will happen 30 years from now. Bottomline is, it "is" gonna happen.

I only wish the world would just look at things realistically or with an open mind. There's quite a few countries that have an unrealistic view of the world. Problems do not go away if you leave it alone. There are times when you have to take action. Sadly, at times, violent action.
Well Said! I Salute You.

<Im Yo Pusha>
11-20-2002, 04:31 PM
Well said Inky Binky

C'jais
11-20-2002, 04:42 PM
Inky, you cannot predict or compare the consequences to Desert Storm - DS was about oil rights, this is about attacking a nation because you fear they may attack someone else.

On the same grounds, we should attack USA because they are haboring nuclear weapons that we do not know when they'll use. USA is itself a "rogue state" (love that expression).

If USA attacks Irak, Bush may start to be viewed to other countries as a dictator, forcing his views down on other countries and in a position for world domination.

Note: this is not an anti-american post - I'm simply using hypotheses to a big extent, not my own beliefs.

Clem
11-20-2002, 05:08 PM
ever heard of M.A.D. (mutually assured destruction)... this is y nukes wont be used

maybe terrorists might use them (the sort that do suicide attacks) ... but they wont get hold of them without trouble

iraq however could neva use nukes cos they themselves will be destroyed

and this world has enuff crazed madmen with access to nukes in america .... y piss another 1 off

i will repeat this WE CANNOTY FORCE OUR RELIGION/MORALITY ON OTHER PEOPLES THIS IS JUST PLAIN WRONG

Professor Snape
11-20-2002, 06:24 PM
Well the only real way saddam could attack us with his weapons is if he bombed our army while we were over there. If Saddam did fire his weapons, it would probably be fired on our little friend Israel.


This idea is probably gonna get flamed but we should Nuke the entire middle east and start over.

ckcsaber
11-20-2002, 06:34 PM
Yes lets nuke all of the middle east:rolleyes:


I'm sure you could figure out why thats a bad idea if you try hard enough

Professor Snape
11-20-2002, 06:49 PM
yea it is a bad idea cuz alotta innocent ppl would die. But it would solve some problems as Palistine, Iraq, Mayb Osama, Al Quada or whatever.

The USA has a hard time finding one person. ANd the news media kills the surprise. All Osama has to do is watch CNN and move to where USA ain't attacking.

And to teh guy who wants to attack USA, just wait 2 more years dude. Bush might not be reelected. I was hoping Rudy could run for pres(Former mayor of NYC)

They one thing i don't think bush admin. has right is that IF we get rid of Saddam, the Iraqie ppl with be happy. Well don't they love Saddam so i dunno if they will be happy

Breton
11-20-2002, 07:00 PM
First, I want you to remember that it is Bush that is attacking, not Saddam.

Secondly, Bush should really get evidence for Iraq having weapons of mass destruction before he attacks them for having it. This is just what the weapon inspectors are going to do now, but the US goverment does not like that, especially they don't like the weapon inspectors leader Hans Blix, ok no one likes a swede anyway, but still...

Thirdly, you must remember that it was US that actually helped Iraq getting those weapons in the first place, just like it was they that originally supported Bin Laden, giving him weapons and stuff. Isn't that enough reason for Bush to attack USA, since they are such a major threat to the american people?

Also, if Saddam do have mass destruction weapons, he would probably use them if USA attacks, since he has then nothing to lose.

And there is always the chance for a WW3 to break out. Obviously, Bush never think this far, since he has an IQ of about 90 (this is true).

Bush also obviously do not know that a goverment change can be done without a war. For example Norway got free from Sweden simply because of politics (and Sweden was about double as large as Norway, and had a much greater army).


Do you have any idea how many people die to the hand of Saddam EACH DAY? DO YOU!? A terrorist like him needs to and must be destroyed.

And do you have any idea of how many innocent lives that are lost each day in Afghanistan, lifes that could have been spared? The war with Bin Laden has lasted a long time now, but still it has accomplished nothing, Bin Laden is still free, and is probably sunbathing on Hawaii as we speak. So do not forget about the terrorist George W. Bush, who should also be destroyed. Or do you really value an innocent american life over an innocent afghanian life?



i do think that saddam is bad, but i don't think they should attack iraq for it, it's a bit complicated. but they sould try to only kill saddam

The problem is that most of Iraq actually supports Saddam, probably because of massive propaganda, but if they just kill Saddam it is very likely that one of his sons or something will take over leadership, and now it's even worse, because now Iraq will be really furious.

I think that the USA, should get a nuclear weapon, find saddam, launch missle, bye bye war!
This idea is probably gonna get flamed but we should Nuke the entire middle east and start over.

Very funny:D

Cause you're joking, right? Right?! RIGHT?!?!?

PhantomHelix
11-20-2002, 07:05 PM
yeah! lets nuke em all! :D lol, im just kiddin.....

anywho,we just gotta wait to see what becomes of this situation.....

Jedi_Monk
11-20-2002, 07:16 PM
You all talk about how we may start WW3 and what not... Do you have any idea how many people die to the hand of Saddam EACH DAY? DO YOU!?
No... do you?

I've debated this issue more times than I can count; if you want to know what I think about it, then I'll give you two links:

The first is to another "Attack Iraq" thread on the Swamp. I recommend you read all of it. Yes, I know it's long, but if you're going to open your mouth and argue about an issue of this magnitude, then you'd better know what you're talking about:
War (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=78289)

The second link is to the transcript of a speech I gave at my youth group on 10/6/02 applying the Just War doctrine to a war with Iraq:
There is such a thing as a Just War--is this one? (http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/IraqSpeech10602.html)

http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/Jedi_Monk.jpg

Professor Snape
11-20-2002, 07:17 PM
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn


And there is always the chance for a WW3 to break out. Obviously, Bush never think this far, since he has an IQ of about 90 (this is true).


So do not forget about the terrorist George W. Bush, who should also be destroyed. Or do you really value an innocent american life over an innocent afghanian life?

Very funny:D

Cause you're joking, right? Right?! RIGHT?!?!?

First yes i was joking about bombing the entire middle east. So many innocent lives should never be lost like that.

And how is George W a terrorist? He doesn't kills thousands of ppl because of a religious idea. He is actually trying his best to be like his father. If u think about it, It is actually George Bush Senior's 2nd term. Cuz George W probably asks his dad what to do all the time. And both are going after Iraq.

Now. George W ain't got an IQ of 90 dude. If he can become the president of the USA, then he has a higher IQ.

And where are u from?

JandoFett1842
11-20-2002, 07:55 PM
Its ok with me if we beat the s*** out of em!! Just so long as they dont start drafting again and iraq donsnt bomb our home

Elijah
11-20-2002, 08:10 PM
Its all to easy for the non usa people out there to just sit back and throw thier 2 cents around about why we shouldnt fight.

DiRtY $oUtHô
11-20-2002, 08:45 PM
I think we need to wipe out Iraq so we can get free oil and make it part of the United States...I mean come on, what ever happened to the good ol usa? Back when this country started, we were continually expanding. Now we dont wanna take over anybody's country. **** that. Let's make the US bigger and get us some free oil!

Weapon X
11-20-2002, 09:23 PM
ok, since there are way too many posts for my liking, i only read the first 2 or 3, but my views are as follows: take out the potential threat, when the japanese bombed pearl harbor we kicked the **** out of them (excuse the lang.) and there were no more problems, i think if we do that to iraq then people will think "holy jesus jumped christ, the americans aren't afraid to take out the big guns!" and people would back off, or if we just sent in 1-2 of our best snipers who are willing to do the job, they go in and take out sadaam, they don't know who did it, bush tells them if they want it to come and get it, and it looks like they start the fight/war, OR they go on wondering where the snipers are, where they're from, and how many other troops there are, it'd be a quick in-and-out mission, and it might solve the problems or start bigger ones, who knows, but personally, if they OR we start a war, i'm joining the corps to go kick some ass, defend my country and the people in it, the people who stand around with signs saying "jobs not bombs" "you're really starting to scare me bush" and stupid stuff like that, news flash people, OUR military, the one that goes and fights wars and battles in other countries is what is allowing you to put up those signs and bad mouth your countries leader, it is the military that keeps us safe and allows us to live our lives, and alls people can do is badmouth it, it's sad, i'm gonna throw some snowballs or harass them tomorrow if they're out again

Wacky_Baccy
11-20-2002, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by Cjais
Me and some friends have talked about something:

If USA joined hands with Europe, we could assume world domination, and dictate the human rights on other, less civilized countries.

Just an idea :rolleyes:
I was beginning to wonder if it was just me who had noticed that...
Posted by Darth Strom
[...] However, if NATO (US, Canada, Mexico for those who dont know) joined forces w/ Europe, we could be very sucessful in utilizing resources from weak counties (beating up on Kuwait for their oil) that sort of thing.
Are you saying that NATO consits of the US, Canada, and Mexico? ...Do you actually know what "NATO" stands for? (NOT intended as a flame - I'm just curious :))
Posted by ep2 Anakin
ok, since there are way too many posts for my liking, i only read the first 2 or 3, but my views are as follows: take out the potential threat, when the japanese bombed pearl harbor we kicked the **** out of them (excuse the lang.) and there were no more problems[...]
No more problems? Interesting way of looking at it... You fought with them for several years, but had to resort to using two nuclear weapons to finally make them submit (I am not saying that was not necessary)... Are you willing to do the same if Iraq refuses to surrender if or when you attack it? Even if you are the ones who make the first move? This seems to be what you are implying...

Weapon X
11-20-2002, 10:54 PM
well the japanese aren't tryin to fight us anymore are they?

ET Warrior
11-20-2002, 11:02 PM
Originally posted by Darth Strom


I very much agree, the USA isnt trying to bully anyone, but if Iraq becomes enough of a threat we should act on em'
Jais, I like ur idea, except the US would have no interest in being a global bully and attacking smaller countries.
The United States is probably the biggest bully of a country that there has ever been. When other countries decide that they want to do what's in their best interests but it's going to cost the US money, what do we do? Not support them in their efforts to improve their own living conditions, no, we go in and overthrow their leader and put in a pro US guy, one who will allow us to force their children to make our shoes for pennies a day while we sell them for 50 dollars. One who will enslave his own people because we are making him a rich man for it. Don't believe me? Take a class over the cold war. See what our presidents have ordered the CIA to do.
So we ARE in fact being bullies.

I think we need to wipe out Iraq so we can get free oil and make it part of the United States...I mean come on, what ever happened to the good ol usa? Back when this country started, we were continually expanding. Now we dont wanna take over anybody's country. **** that. Let's make the US bigger and get us some free oil!
Please oh please let you be joking.....

Wacky_Baccy
11-20-2002, 11:08 PM
^ I dearly hope that he is... But it's beginning not to surprise me when people say things like that and mean it :(
Posted by ep2 Anakin
well the japanese aren't tryin to fight us anymore are they?
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at... Could you clarify a bit?

ET Warrior
11-20-2002, 11:08 PM
Originally posted by ep2 Anakin
well the japanese aren't tryin to fight us anymore are they?


Yeah, and all we had to do was kill a million innocent people. :rolleyes: And of course these days since our nukes are over 100 times more powerful than the ones we dropped on japan, we could concievably completely irradicate an entire country. I dont know about you, but i dont know if i could live with the knowledge that i belong to a country who could single handedly destroy so much innocent life.

JandoFett1842
11-20-2002, 11:17 PM
We should beat the **** out of them, with the way they act and treat people who want to keep the world safe, like i think zdowg said "its easy for people outside the us to not care and come up with why we shouldnt attack" but how would you like it if they were directly treataning Britan, Austirela, Switzerland, ect.

And a note to Dark Yoda:
The United States is not an empire, we would not take them over and rule them like a providence. Most likely what would hapent would be that we would help them set up a democratic system/parlament thing and they would rule themselfs and suply us with oil. Also on the oil note, we have many untaped oil wells in alaska that could be used but we dont becuase of the envioment (damn tree huggers)

ET Warrior
11-20-2002, 11:24 PM
Middle eastern countries are angry at the US, NOT because we have freedom and they don't. NOT because they just want somebody to pick on. But because we have bullied them and had our way with them in the past. I dont really feel like citing specific examples because i've been touring schools all day today with my musical and i'm REALLY tired, but i'm sure you could search it out on the net. or look in a history book around the time of the cold war.

Wacky_Baccy
11-20-2002, 11:40 PM
Posted by JandoFett1842
We should beat the **** out of them, with the way they act and treat people who want to keep the world safe, like i think zdowg said "its easy for people outside the us to not care and come up with why we shouldnt attack" but how would you like it if they were directly treataning Britan, Austirela, Switzerland, ect.
*winces*

I shan't say anything else so as to avoid a flame war...
The United States is not an empire, we would not take them over and rule them like a providence. Most likely what would hapent would be that we would help them set up a democratic system/parlament thing and they would rule themselfs [...]
Like you did in Afghanistan? ...Although I suppose with the prospect of cheap oil, you'd probably make MUCH more of an effort to rebuild the country you devastated...

ET Warrior
11-20-2002, 11:49 PM
Well, to give the US some credit, we do have a lot of non-profit organizations like Unicef and the Red Cross who are doing as much as they can to help afghanistan.

Wacky_Baccy
11-21-2002, 12:00 AM
True, but it shouldn't be left to them in the first place... :(

ET Warrior
11-21-2002, 12:05 AM
Understandably, but the government spent all it's money sending in the troops to mess up the country, can't afford to fix it. So it's left to the kind hearted citizens to fix it....;)

Wacky_Baccy
11-21-2002, 12:18 AM
LOL!

I think the US government would have to try a bit harder then that to spend all their money :D ...They could buy Afghanistan if they really wanted to O.O ...I wonder if there's much oil there - that might pique their interest :p :D ;)

Breton
11-21-2002, 06:17 PM
Originally posted by ep2 Anakin
ok, since there are way too many posts for my liking, i only read the first 2 or 3, but my views are as follows: take out the potential threat, when the japanese bombed pearl harbor we kicked the **** out of them (excuse the lang.) and there were no more problems, i think if we do that to iraq then people will think "holy jesus jumped christ, the americans aren't afraid to take out the big guns!" and people would back off,

Do you have any idea on what you actually did to the civillians in Japan?

I'll give you a clue: Once upon a time there was a little girl named Yonanga. She lived with her parents in a small, cozy house with nice decoring. Each day she went to school, where she also met her friends. She was very interested in music and art, and she wanted to be a great musician someday. She was very good at school, and her parents were very proud of her. But suddenly one day, in 1945, she and her family died a terrible death, and all the dreams she have had were nothing more, neither was she, or anything she had ever lived for.

If you take this single tragedy, and multiplies it with 200 000, you are quite close to see how dreadful this action really was.

You must respect the value of each single human life.

, OUR military, the one that goes and fights wars and battles in other countries is what is allowing you to put up those signs and bad mouth your countries leader, it is the military that keeps us safe and allows us to live our lives,

Peace can be kept without military. Military is used for war.
And do not think that USA is the only country in the world where people are allowed to say and mean what they want.

if they OR we start a war, i'm joining the corps to go kick some ass, defend my country and the people in it,

So you mean that bombing civillian towns, killing innocents (always happens in war), and ruining the life of millions of people that hasn't done anything to deserve it, you will do that just because it will make you and your family feel a little safer? Sad...:( :(


well the japanese aren't tryin to fight us anymore are they?

No, it seems like they have grown more civilized than certain other countries.


This is my opinions, and NOT encouraging to flame war. I respect that every person have their own opinions, but I want people to actually mind the human value.

Weapon X
11-21-2002, 10:49 PM
where are you from? i don't think you're from the states, if you are, do you not care about what happened at pearl harbor? or what about the attacks on the twin towers? what about those? if people in those countries don't want to be in the middle of a war then they should hot foot it out of there, yonanga met a quick death, and that was the purpose of the bomb, to kill many people and show our power and capabilities, so there's some clarification, the government wouldn't use something that powerful if they didn't mean to kill that many people, so i got you there, and what you said about people being kept w/o a military, no, if the US did not have any defenses we would be overrun and they WOULDN'T be able to put up those signs, so i got you there too, face it, my side of the argument is better :P

Elijah
11-21-2002, 11:02 PM
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn
I'll give you a clue: Once upon a time there was a little girl named Yonanga. She lived with her parents in a small, cozy house with nice decoring. Each day she went to school, where she also met her friends. She was very interested in music and art, and she wanted to be a great musician someday. She was very good at school, and her parents were very proud of her. But suddenly one day, in 1945, she and her family died a terrible death, and all the dreams she have had were nothing more, neither was she, or anything she had ever lived for.

If you take this single tragedy, and multiplies it with 200 000, you are quite close to see how dreadful this action really was.
And this didn't happen to the people in Perl Harbor? or The Twin Towers?
The Japs are the ones who started the fight, they should have been redy to take the bullet back. The same with Bin Laden.

Jedi_Monk
11-22-2002, 01:20 AM
There is absolutely no proof that Saddam Hussein is in league with Al Queda and bin Ladin. None. Bin Ladin gets whatever he deserves, but Hussein has done nothing to us, and the only reason we would attack Iraq would be because we want their oil. Saddam and bin Ladin are not the same, they are two totally different people and one is infinitely more of a danger to us than the other.

http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/Jedi_Monk.jpg

ShadowTemplar
11-22-2002, 08:48 AM
Alot of people here seem concerned with the prospect of WWIII.

IMO we already have a WW on our hands.

"You are either with us or against us". Does that rethoric ring a bell?

Anyway, 11/9-01 NATO was attacked. Therefore NATO has been in war ever since (ß5 I think). And NATO allied with Russia, China, and alot of other big states in that war, so it already spans the globe.

2)Look at INDIA and PAKISTAN. These 2 countries recently added nuclear weaponry to their arsenals and what do they do? They still creat conflict among themselves. Its a very real possibility that the first nuclear war will be between these 2 childish countries. As for IRAQ, we're not gonna fight them 'cause we think they're gonna launch a bunch of nucelar missles at us. What we're worried about is if Saddam Hussein manages to make nuclear weapons, there's a pretty good possibility he will give the know how, the resources, the expertise, and yes maybe an actual bomb to terrorists groups or states. Stopping him from doing this won't solve the whole problem 'cause there are others doing the same thing. But if you take him out of the equation (kill him or arrest him), well thats one "less" problem to worry about.

Regarding India and Pakistan: They are a problem. They are in a religious war, which means that they absolutly will not stop until every last one of them is dead. There is little that we can do about that, 'cept to prevent them from using nukes.

Correction: The first nuclear war was WWII.

Saddam hasn't got ICBMs, but fundamentalists are crazy enough to sail a boat into a harbor and arm a nuke in it manually. Besides: Launching a missile is like writing in big firery letters that can be read from here to the moon: I am right here, and I want to get my butt bombed so hard that my skull and my beard end up on different continents.

C'Jais: I think that the pretext for the Gulf War was actually Iraq invading Kuwait. Though you may very well be right about the motive.

And there is always the chance for a WW3 to break out. Obviously, Bush never think this far, since he has an IQ of about 90 (this is true).

I actually think that it is closer to 80 (I know for a fact that he is the El Presidente with the lowest IQ ever. And the secondlowest was... Right in one! His dad).

Bush also obviously do not know that a goverment change can be done without a war. For example Norway got free from Sweden simply because of politics (and Sweden was about double as large as Norway, and had a much greater army).

You are talking about the Kadmar Union, right? That was under Danish suprime rule. But I think that Sweden was in it too.

ET Warrior
11-22-2002, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by ep2 Anakin
where are you from? i don't think you're from the states, if you are, do you not care about what happened at pearl harbor? or what about the attacks on the twin towers? what about those? if people in those countries don't want to be in the middle of a war then they should hot foot it out of there, yonanga met a quick death, and that was the purpose of the bomb, to kill many people and show our power and capabilities, so there's some clarification, the government wouldn't use something that powerful if they didn't mean to kill that many people, so i got you there, and what you said about people being kept w/o a military, no, if the US did not have any defenses we would be overrun and they WOULDN'T be able to put up those signs, so i got you there too, face it, my side of the argument is better :P

Well since you apparently haven't read my posts, i'll inform you once again. Osama Bin Laden does not hate us because of our religious freedom, nor our personal freedoms, he doesn't hate us because of our money (he has enough of his own) He hates us because we are the world's bully, pushing around the little countries when they do things that we dont like. Bay of Pigs for example, we had no right to try to start an uprising, but we tried anyways. And there was a south american country that tried to nationalize it's fruit fields, but we went in and overthrew their leader because it would have cost us the cheap labor we were getting from their citizens. Now i'm not saying that osama bin laden was justified in what he did. Not atall. But you should at least be informed of WHY this all happened in the first place. They were not completely unprovoked as most people think.

And Pearl Harbor, while unprovoked, was an attack on a military installation, they did not send in their bombers to New York City to kill as many people as they could. They were trying to cripple the millitary of a foe who would probably have ended up in the war anyways, and had enough power to pose a serious threat to them. So they made a pre-emptive strike.

Breton
11-22-2002, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by ShadowTemplar

You are talking about the Kadmar Union, right? That was under Danish suprime rule. But I think that Sweden was in it too.

:tsk: :tsk: :tsk:

The Kalmar Union was made not long after the viking age and was a union wich Norway, Denmark and Sweden made. However, the swedes pulled out of the union pretty quickly, and as the years went by, it ended up as Norway being a part of Denmark. But then the Napoleon wars came. Denmark-Norway wanted to keep out of this war. But they had a large navy, and the Brittish was afraid that Napoleon might capture these boats, to use against Brittany. So the Brittish demanded the boats themselves. Denmark-Norway refused of course, but had to give in when the Brittish bombed Copenhagen for serveral days. From then, Denmark-Norway was on Napoleon's side. And when he lost, Denmark were forced to give Norway to Sweden, in 1814. Norway declared themselves free from Sweden in 1905.

Elijah
11-22-2002, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
Well since you apparently haven't read my posts, i'll inform you once again. Osama Bin Laden does not hate us because of our religious freedom, nor our personal freedoms, he doesn't hate us because of our money (he has enough of his own) He hates us because we are the world's bully, pushing around the little countries when they do things that we dont like. Let me Infrom you that you have been Misinformed.
Bin Laden has attacked us with what is called a "Gie-Had" (sp?)
A Religious assult because so many Americans (like myslef) believe in jesus-christ, we are christians, and American was founded BY CHRISTIANS.

Jedi_Monk
11-22-2002, 02:30 PM
Bin Laden has attacked us with what is called a "Gie-Had" (sp?)
A Religious assult because so many Americans (like myslef) believe in jesus-christ, we are christians, and American was founded BY CHRISTIANS.
I thought Bin Ladin's holy war was about getting us "infidels" out of Saudi Arabia, away from their holy cities of Mecca and Medina, and also about our support of Israel (which is currently in violation of quite a few UN resolutions, itself) :rolleyes: But we just have to have a presence there (Saudi Arabia) because of all that oil. There's ino excuse for what Bin Ladin did, and police action (not randomly starting wars and hoping he gets caught by one of our bombs) has the narrow scope to find him.

We bombed the hell out of Afghanistan and what did it get us? Bin Ladin's alive, the Taliban seems to be coming back, our soldiers are being picked off by some very irate natives and the government we installed there is under serious threat. We "hit a beehive with a baseball bat." We just scattered the enemies and now they're swarming back and hate us more than ever.

War is not the answer to stopping terrorism!

Those who would become terrorists are desperate people, and the threat of use of force from us against their innocent countrymen may just provoke more of them into joining the terrorists network.

Think about this: after 9/11 how many people did you hear say that they wanted to join the army so that they could pay back bin Ladin for what he did to everyone in the Twin Towers? How many of you felt that way?

Now imagine what it would be like to have been an innocent civilian in Afghanistan and have your whole family killed in one of our bombing raids. Is it so amazing to you to think that they're just as human as we are, and that they would want to pay us back for all of the family members they lost? But Afghanistan's army isn't exactly up to par with ours, so what is this person going to do to get his vengeance? Maybe he's going to join a terrorist cell, and maybe we've just created a new terrorist, out for American blood.

It is hopelessness that is encouraging them to go out and end their lives and take as many of us along with them as possible. Hell no, Bin Ladin isn't justified--but why does he have such a following? Why are so many people willing to become his walking, talking bombs? Why do they hate us and what can we do to stop it? Killing their mothers, fathers, their brothers their sisters, their cousins, their grandparents, their aunts, their uncles, their friends... and destroying everything they know with indiscriminate bombing raids... what does that do to the psyche of a person? All they know of us is that we fly over them and drop death from above.

And why are you bringing Bin Ladin into a thread about attacking Iraq?

...so many Americans (like myslef) believe in jesus-christ...
Ironic. Who would Jesus bomb? :tsk:

http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/Jedi_Monk.jpg

ET Warrior
11-22-2002, 05:58 PM
Originally posted by ZDawg
Let me Infrom you that you have been Misinformed.
Bin Laden has attacked us with what is called a "Gie-Had" (sp?)
A Religious assult because so many Americans (like myslef) believe in jesus-christ, we are christians, and American was founded BY CHRISTIANS.

An excuse for waging war against america because they hate us. They hate our support of israel, they hate our bully tactics. They hate us, not our religion.

I agree 100% with Jedi_Monk, as usual.

Qui-GONE Jinn
11-22-2002, 08:15 PM
Like ET said, people don't hate you because you're free and believe in a different God. It's because of the way you bully smaller countries around (and indeed, who could stand against the might of the US?) and act as world police, as the big boy who can't seem to stop bugging the smaller children.

How many wars have been waged in the name of Jesus Christ, the most holy man who's ever lived? A man who didn't do anyone any harm for his entire life? How many people have been slaughtered by the hands of men, claiming superiority because they believe in Christ?

The fact that you believe in Jesus doesn't mean that you, or your religion is any better than anyone else's. A muslim isn't an animal, even though he's likely very different than you.
Fundamentalism however, in any religion is terrible, and makes people into animals.

Wake up, you Americans do not hold the fate of the world in your hands. And you know what? You've given far more beating, in any conflict you've been part of (and likely started, indirectly or directly, yourselves) than you've received.

Yeah, we feel sorry about the TT and Pear Harbor. But you know, most people in the world has forgotten it already. That you suffered losses, doesn't justify your actions and rapes against smaller countries. Don't remind us about 9/11 all the damn time, it makes you look like self-righteous sissies, 9/11 was terrible and we were all shocked. BUT it's in the past. Now, what we should do is try to make the world better, not worse. And improvements doesn't come by the sword.
With it's actions, the US is only gaining more enemies.

ET Warrior
11-22-2002, 08:28 PM
I will repeat that i am in no way defending what happened on september 11th, that was a horrible day in american history, and something that no american will forget. But look at how war hungry we are.
WAR IS THE REASON TERRORISM HAPPENS.
You cannot fight a war against terrorism, it's not possible, because anyone can be a terrorist, all they need is a small explosive device and a public place to put it. To end terrorism we need to stop the things that cause people to be terrorists. This does not involve killing them. This involves being nice, helping them in times of need, not interfering in everything they do. Allowing them the way they want to live, not the way we think they should live. Not forcing their children to make our shoes and shirts and soccer balls for pennies a day. THIS would help more than a thousand nuclear bombs.

yet this has strayed far off-topic, the thread is not about terrorism. It's about Attacking Iraq. No, we should not go to war with Iraq.

Clem
11-22-2002, 08:43 PM
ill say this again .... ive said it be4

this forum IS NOT MATURE ENOUGH to argue on these matters (gun control, war, terrorism etc.) maybe some of us are

but most are not

also, none of us are in posession of even as much as 10% of the info on this so we cannot make an informed argument

Jedi_Monk
11-22-2002, 08:58 PM
also, none of us are in posession of even as much as 10% of the info on this so we cannot make an informed argument
After watching the House and Senate debate this issue, I can assure you, I know at least as much as they do. That's the problem with America today (well... one of many problems... but the one that's relevant to this discussion), the people think that their representatives are infallable and that we should just allow them to lead us wherever they want because they know best... but that's not democracy. If we don't like what our representatives are doing, we should be vocal about it... that is democracy.

http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/Jedi_Monk.jpg

Clem
11-22-2002, 09:00 PM
even politicians have secrets kept from them

even they are victims of propoganda

they dont always say what they know .... or admit what they know .... only what will help them

also politicians twist facts in their favour

so if a senate debate is nething like a parliment debate you will only have heard the facts they know twisted

Weapon X
11-23-2002, 12:59 AM
Originally posted by Jedi_Monk

After watching the House and Senate debate this issue, I can assure you, I know at least as much as they do. That's the problem with America today (well... one of many problems... but the one that's relevant to this discussion), the people think that their representatives are infallable and that we should just allow them to lead us wherever they want because they know best... but that's not democracy. If we don't like what our representatives are doing, we should be vocal about it... that is democracy.

http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/Jedi_Monk.jpg

i can almost gurantee you that you don't know "at least as much as they do" you probably don't even know half of it, it's not like they say "oh Jedi_Monk, here's all of the info that we have, go win online arguments" i didn't think so, so don't make lies to make yourself look smarter or to try to intimidate us into not arguing, it won't work, i said what i said and i stand by it, thanks zdawg for basically bein on my side, you understand at least, unlike some others on this board

Elijah
11-23-2002, 02:44 AM
Don't remind us about 9/11 all the damn time, it makes you look like self-righteous sissies, 9/11 was terrible and we were all shocked. BUT it's in the past. Oh, ok! Its really that easy to forget the blatant massacre of thousands of our countrymen. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by ep2 Anakin
i said what i said and i stand by it As Do I.

thanks zdawg for basically bein on my side, you understand at least, unlike some others on this board They just donít understand, killing a hundred people to save a million or more.

War is not the answer to stopping terrorism! Oh? And what is?

Ironic. Who would Jesus bomb? :tsk: A Good question, but because Iím not the son of God, I can't answer that.

acdcfanbill
11-23-2002, 04:00 AM
Lets keep the discussion a bit more civil, this is turning into WW3...

C'jais
11-23-2002, 10:29 AM
Israel is as bad as Irak, hiding nukes and terrorizing the population, and USA hides nukes as well. Therefore, you're saying we should attack Isreal and USA as well?

Attacking Irak on the grounds of "We think he's hiding something, he's not gonna use it except if we attack, and we better make a pre-emptive strike" is a very bad idea. Basically, you invite everyone to refer to you as Tyrants and attack you on just the same premises.

Basically, NATO as a whole refuses this, but USA just wants to rush in and get it over with.

Breton
11-23-2002, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by ep2 Anakin


i can almost gurantee you that you don't know "at least as much as they do" you probably don't even know half of it, it's not like they say "oh Jedi_Monk, here's all of the info that we have, go win online arguments" i didn't think so, so don't make lies to make yourself look smarter or to try to intimidate us into not arguing, it won't work, i said what i said and i stand by it, thanks zdawg for basically bein on my side, you understand at least, unlike some others on this board

So you think that you know all there is to know about it? You don't. No one does. I know what is told to me, by television, by books, by internet, and by other people. And through this, I have made an opinion. I strongly belive that you don't know any more than the rest of us. Unless you are some kind of 'middle east expert' or something.

Oh, ok! Its really that easy to forget the blatant massacre of thousands of our countrymen.

The past still don't give you the right to massacre thousands of Afghanians. Two wrongs don't make one right.



They just donít understand, killing a hundred people to save a million or more.

If you could save a million people by killing a hundred, that would be nice, but it is far from what you are doing in the middle east. What you are doing is more like killing 5000 civillians, just to make the terrorists, who easily get away, even more angry and even more likely to perform more terrorist acts. And you still haven't got the real bastard behind it all. The "war against terrorism" is so far a failure.

As ET Warrior said, you can't fight a war againt terrorism.

It would be a better world if US was split up. Right now they are the worlds only "super power", and their goverment would never let anyone become another. This is why the US goverment think they can bully around with everyone, and get away with it. They show no responsibility for the rest of the world. For example they use lots and lots of money on bombs and weapons, but is still holding money back that they are supposed to pay the UN. Also, all international deals to generally create a better world (the Kyoto deal, human right thing, plus a lot of others) is refused by US, and that also makes other countries refuse, even though they was originally going to accept.

Weapon X
11-23-2002, 11:24 AM
JM Qui-Gon, i NEVER said i knew at least as much as our politicians and the people in power who are making decisions like jedi monk did, i NEVER said that, don't put words into my mouth, i know i don't know the half of it so i'm not sayin i do, with that said: i think it was zdawg who mentioned the ji-had, he got you there, haha, you were all like "oh they never attacked us on the basis of religion, it's just that they don't like us and need an excuse" if that's true, then why can't we attack them just cuz we don't like them? in fact that's what we're doing, attacking them cuz we don't like them and masking it w/ "they have nukes" whatever:rolleyes:, the fact is, they attacked US CITIZENS, not a military instillation in NY and the pentagon was also to try to break the military, cuz that's where all the orders come from, basically the military's headquarters is the pentagon, and you know what? i'll bet none of you had family in washington when all this happened did you? i did, my uncle had the plane land 50ft. from him, he was in his office, and it killed one of his best friends, and even though they told him he could go home and talk with his family, he stayed to pull out bodies alive and dead, my aunt went missing for hours and noone had any idea where she might be, she has only an 8-9 yr. old little boy for family, imagine if she had been killed? i can tell you know when they mentioned the pentagon bein hit i had an adrenaline rush like a mother ****er, cuz my family was in danger, and that gives me the right to say go to war with them sons of bitches, cuz they need to be taken down one or two levels, and although no one in my family was hurt other than emotionally (my uncle only had like 1st degree burns on him, but it was all over, but he's a tough son bitch) i still have extreme hatred for everyone in afghanistan, if they don't want a war then they can leave that country, if they don't, oh well, they'll get somethin real soon, and i hope to be part of it

C'jais
11-23-2002, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by ep2 Anakin
and that gives me the right to say go to war with them sons of bitches, cuz they need to be taken down one or two levels, and although no one in my family was hurt other than emotionally (my uncle only had like 1st degree burns on him, but it was all over, but he's a tough son bitch) i still have extreme hatred for everyone in afghanistan, if they don't want a war then they can leave that country, if they don't, oh well, they'll get somethin real soon, and i hope to be part of it

It does not give you the right to do anything, Anakin. If anger gave people some supernatural right to do something, then we already have eradicated each other in a blood frenzy.

The terrorists aren't using religion as their motive, but as their excuse. There's a big difference. Do you really believe that if Afghanistan was as rich as USA they would do it? No, they're using unequal treatment as their motive and utilizing religion as their excuse and make it seem like they have some divine right to do it.

Stick to the subject, this isn't about Afghanistan or 9/11.

ET Warrior
11-23-2002, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by ep2 Anakin
i'll bet none of you had family in washington when all this happened did you
No, i had family in New York.
i can tell you know when they mentioned the pentagon bein hit i had an adrenaline rush like a mother ****er, cuz my family was in danger, and that gives me the right to say go to war with them sons of bitches, cuz they need to be taken down one or two levels,

Now stop, think of the fear, anger, and pain you were feeling when you heard that. The people in Afghanistan have been feeling that pain for their whole lives at the hands of israeli soldiers, who got their weapons and support from the US. Not to mention the US bombs their country all the time. You think that you have the right to get mad and fight back but they dont? And they don't have a military capable of doing anything, so what do they do? Strap bombs to themselves and lash out, or hijack planes and ram buildings..It's not right, but it's what happens when people are pushed too far. More war will only make things worse. Sure, we'll scare the afghani's for awhile, but they'll just come back madder and meaner.

And that's it, i'm done with the off topic terrorist business.

Jedi_Monk
11-23-2002, 01:19 PM
The thing about American politicians is that a lot of them aren't exactly the brightest and the best... they're just the people who had enough money to win.

And with a subject like this--that depends so much on having public opinion behind it--why would the supporters for war in Washington tell less than the most damning evidence they could find? Did they want to surprise Saddam with an attack? There was never going to be any surprise... they were saying, "We want war with Iraq" for months before this vote. No, they were putting forth their best arguments--arguments which I'd heard before (on these boards, no less). A lot of this "evidence" has been refuted by some very reliable sources in the news media... if you want the links, they're all posted on the war thread that I linked to in my first post. And despite how popular this war seems, a unilateral attack never got more than 35% of the population behind it, and even support for a multilateral attack is now waning.

Ari Fleischer actually said that the administration was just throwing out accusations until one of them stuck. So far, nothing has stuck. Basically, in one form or another, every argument for war has come out and been debunked.

http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/Jedi_Monk.jpg

ET Warrior
11-23-2002, 01:24 PM
I can't think of any real reason why we SHOULD go to war with Iraq........they aren't provoking us, so what do we gain by attacking them?

Jedi_Monk
11-23-2002, 01:30 PM
ep2 Anakin, I am truly sorry that you had to go through that...

But, you've just made one of my points. Would you want some poor Iraqi to go through the same thing you did? And if they did, then is it so hard to believe that they would want revenge on America?

You said:
if they don't want a war then they can leave that country, if they don't, oh well, they'll get somethin real soon, and i hope to be part of it
So is it so hard for you to believe that one of them would say the exact same thing?

War leads to a cycle of violence.

http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/Jedi_Monk.jpg

Jedi_Monk
11-23-2002, 01:48 PM
And ZDawg, I asked you who would Jesus bomb and you said:
A Good question, but because Iím not the son of God, I can't answer that.
What is the point of being a follower of Christ, as you say you are, if you don't try to follow the example of Christ? Being a Christian is more than going to church, sitting in the front row, holding up your hands and belting out your prayers and hymns as loud as you can. Didn't Jesus say, "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall be shown mercy... blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called children of God..." (Mt 5:7, Mt 5:9)?

I think you should read Matthew 6:38-39, "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on your right cheek, turn the other one to him as well."

Now who do you say Jesus would bomb?

http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/Jedi_Monk.jpg

ShockV1.89
11-23-2002, 02:14 PM
Well, if anyone is curious about Al-Qaedas motives...
http://www.bad-seed.org/notes/archives/00000145.shtml (this is an excerpt from the manual)

Basically, they're angry at anybody who they think is "against" the "islamic nation." This is definitley not exclusive to US, but to most Arab leaders as well. We're the strongest, though, so peope notice more when we get hit.

and, the training manual for them. (edited, so terrorists cant actually use it to train...) http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/trainingmanual.htm

You see? Islamic fundementalists have been angry at non-Islamic people since 1924. You think it takes a lot for that anger to jump to the USA? Not really. I'm sure Israel didnt help, either, but as far as I can tell, the only country that has a legitimate problem with Israel is Palestine.

Back on topic now, I think every last measure should be taken to make sure Hussein has no nuclear/bio/chem weapons. I mean, attacking should be the LAST option on the list. War sucks, and everything should be done to avoid it. However...

Hussein cant be trusted with weapons of that magnitude. He hasnt shown himself to be responsible enough. If we let a sociopath like him develop long (or even short) range nukes or perfect a strain of ebola or bubonic plague, we, as a world, are asking for trouble. If he has nothing to hide, then he'll give the inspectors unrestricted access (unlike last time). If he tries to block them from certain palaces and bunkers, we know what he's hiding... and we have to go in swinging.

Elijah
11-23-2002, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
Now stop, think of the fear, anger, and pain you were feeling when you heard that. The people in Afghanistan have been feeling that pain for their whole lives at the hands of israeli soldiers, who got their weapons and support from the US. Not to mention the US bombs their country all the time. You think that you have the right to get mad and fight back but they dont? And they don't have a military capable of doing anything, so what do they do? Strap bombs to themselves and lash out, or hijack planes and ram buildings..It's not right, but it's what happens when people are pushed too far. More war will only make things worse. Sure, we'll scare the afghani's for awhile, but they'll just come back madder and meaner.
The Afgas where trowing a party when the Twin Towers Fell, They dont care about any of us dying.

The Afgan bible (cant remember the name) Tells them to keep they'er sword sharp and redy to kill any christian they may find.

Now who do you say Jesus would bomb? Did Isreal not go to war? Did God not tell them to kill not only the men, but the women and children because they where evil? Did solomon not hack the king into pieces before the children of Isreal?

Breton
11-23-2002, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by ZDawg
The Afgas where trowing a party when the Twin Towers Fell, They dont care about any of us dying.


The pictures of the people partying were fake, they were taken during an islamic festival earlier in the year, and used around the 9/11 events. CNN propaganda.

The Afgan bible (cant remember the name) Tells them to keep they'er sword sharp and redy to kill any christian they may find.

If you are talking about the Coran, the islamic bible, you are very misinformed.

Did Isreal not go to war? Did God not tell them to kill not only the men, but the women and children because they where evil? Did solomon not hack the king into pieces before the children of Isreal?

Well now, that's one of the reasons I am an atheist. In the old testament, God was often really terrible and mean, unlike in the new testament. Since you are christian, do you really mean that what they did was right?

ET Warrior
11-23-2002, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by ZDawg
The Afgas where trowing a party when the Twin Towers Fell, They dont care about any of us dying.



And before 9/11 did YOU care about them dying? Did you even KNOW that they were dying from american bombing raids? Do you even care NOW that they are dying?

Elijah
11-23-2002, 07:31 PM
Since you are christian, do you really mean that what they did was right? If God said it was Right, it was right.

Did you even KNOW that they were dying from american bombing raids? Oh? America was Bombing the afgans with no motive? really? please, do tell.

Breton
11-23-2002, 07:49 PM
Originally posted by ZDawg
If God said it was Right, it was right.


No wonder there are still religious wars in this world:rolleyes:

Jedi_Monk
11-23-2002, 11:14 PM
Did Isreal not go to war? Did God not tell them to kill not only the men, but the women and children because they where evil? Did solomon not hack the king into pieces before the children of Isreal?
That's all Old Testament. Jesus preached a gospel of peace and love and brotherhood and it is our duty as His disciples to follow His example!

"Do not repay anyone evil for evil; be concerned for what is noble in the sight of all. If possible, on your part, live at peace with all. Beloved, do not look for revenge but leave room for wrath; for it is written, 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.'" Romans 12:17-19.

http://members.aol.com/dannilalfletch/Jedi_Monk.jpg

Arkum
11-23-2002, 11:58 PM
let me make a point.

No religion in the world tells people to go kill other people except maybe satanism. but satanism is messed up, so that one doesn't count.

Al-Qaeda has nothing to do with Saddam. In fact, Saddam hates Osama and vice versa. Simple, they both have big egos. Saddam wants to take over the mid-East and Osama is some new age wanna-be Hitler.

Should we attack Iraq? Doesn't really bother me. In the GUlf War, Iraq had 1.1 million troops, the 3rd largest army in the world. Now they only have 360,000 troops, a HUGE decrease. The weapons they have are outdated by at least 10 years and they have less of them. We basically destroyed them in the GUlf War, so if we go now, it'd be the same. WE'd win because they have less troops, weapons, and their weapons are outdated. One difference in a possible war than the GUlf War is that we're trying to remove Saddam from power this time, so the mission is a bit tougher. Last time, we were just there to liberate Kuwait.

And back to that religion thing. Hitler was killing numerous amounts of people. IT was a mass-genocide! was he truly a Christian? I don't think so! was he truly living out christianity? Hell No! Same with Osama. IS he really Muslim? NO, he's just an insane fanatic. is he truly living out Islam? NO, the Qu'ran says to only take up arms only when you have no choice and you have to defend yourself. Nobody attacked him, he's just brainwashing people around him to kill, just like Hitler did. Hitler brainwashed kids as little as 10 years old in his Nazi rallies to join his youth army only to grow up to fight his meaningless battles.

You need to see the real story, not this bull**** that the media puts out.

Elijah
11-24-2002, 02:15 AM
Originally posted by Arkum
No religion in the world tells people to go kill other people except maybe satanism. but satanism is messed up, so that one doesn't count.
Sorry but you are incorrect. Many religions tell people to kill they're enemies.

That's all Old Testament. Jesus preached a gospel of peace and love and brotherhood and it is our duty as His disciples to follow His example! Yea... I Guess your right, I'm letting a bit much of my human side show... I (personaly) think we should destroy Al-Qaedas and Osama Bin Laden... But as you said, thats not what Jesus would do.

Tyrion
11-24-2002, 02:18 AM
Originally posted by ZDawg
thats not what Jesus would do.

Proboly. But wouldnt that only let them do more acts?

Besides, Jesus did peaceful stuff and look where it got him, on a cross;)

Elijah
11-24-2002, 03:14 AM
Originally posted by Tyrion
Besides, Jesus did peaceful stuff and look where it got him, on a cross;) He Died on that cross so sinfull people like my Self and you wouldnt have to burn in Hell. watch your words Tyrion.