Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
jamotto

U.S. Military Deaths in Iraq Pass 1,000

Recommended Posts

quote:

Originally posted by nomad:

Kalshion, the US (let's speak straight: your current president and a few of his aides) has made a personal problem with Irak. Saddam behaved badly in 1990 and he got his slap. Maybe you forgot the interesting evolution of the US arguments concerning the recent intervention:

- First we heard about WMD...

- Then it wasn't WMD but "programmes"...

- Then it was terrorism...

- Now it is to introduce democracy and help the iraqui people...


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by Vixef:

quote:

Originally posted by nomad:

Kalshion, the US (let's speak straight: your current president and a few of his aides) has made a personal problem with Irak. Saddam behaved badly in 1990 and he got his slap. Maybe you forgot the interesting evolution of the US arguments concerning the recent intervention:

- First we heard about WMD...

- Then it wasn't WMD but "programmes"...

- Then it was terrorism...

- Now it is to introduce democracy and help the iraqui people...



Let me correct these misconceptions.

1: Saddam DID have WMD's, not ALL of them were destroyed as the cease fire from the gulf war REQUIRED him to do.

2: The WMD's that were destroyed, Saddam tried to bring back with new WMD programs.

3: It was terrorism and the fact that Saddam SUPPoRTED, financially, with intelligence, and training facilities, terrorists of all stripes, INCLUDING Al Quaeda.

4: Turning Iraq into a Democracy was part of the plan all along.

So what was your point again Nomad, I see that you conveniently forget 12 years of trying to get Saddam to abide by the Cease fire and the 14 resolutions telling him to disarm and destroy the WMD's or face the consequences.

THe WMD's do exist, they have been located, and they are going to be destroyed. After the election, and Bush will win it handily, Syria will get a wake up call about supporting and abiding Saddam and his scientists and his WMD's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Yes, Nomad, the WMD's have been located, the location has been known for quite some time.

THe media had ignored it, but I assure you the Bush administration and the spooks have not.

Official documentation? Sorry, there are no official documents that I can give you, for a variety of reasons, the main one being that none of them are online, and none of them are in the public domain.

BUT, there are plenty of other information sources out there with this information.

I will leave it to you to find them, it could be an eye opening experience for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:

He said that it is unlikely that they will be found in Iraq, and he is exactly right.

In another time and place a semantic argument might hold water, but in this case no one can be expected to believe that if they have found WMD's that they wouldn't be parading that fact around since it WAS their original reason for the invasion.

Besides, either way you cut it, in your scenario the Bush Admin comes off as blatant liars for making statements like those in the article if they aren't true. Which is a hell of a lot worse than believing they were there, only to find they weren't. Which is what they've been saying for months now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You simply cannot have faith in such a deceptive administration...PERIOD. Bush, & Co. are a distinct danger to the welfare of our whole american way of life. If for no other reason, than for setting such a precedent of deceit and manipulation of the truth...and making such a precedent acceptable.

If you cannot trust your leader, to be (at least halfway) honest with you,the people...then it's time to get rid of that leader.

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by street:

You simply cannot have faith in such a deceptive administration...PERIOD. Bush, & Co. are a distinct danger to the welfare of our whole american way of life. If for no other reason, than for setting such a precedent of deceit and manipulation of the truth...and making such a precedent acceptable.

If you cannot trust your leader, to be (at least halfway) honest with you,the people...then it's time to get rid of that leader.

cheers

ROFLMAO!!

OMG, you ACTUALLY believe that?

I thought that you had been in the military?

You do not give away you're most precious piece of information, and give away the fact that there is another target and allow them to prepare.

You need to get a grip, military tactics and information is ALWAYS kept close to the vest, and NEVER made public by the administration that has it.

You even should know better.

Bush and his adminiatration could release the information tomorrow, but it will destroy any secrecy or any surprise that might be necassary to take those WMD's and Syria out without those WMD's being moved elsewhere.

Thank goodness Bush is president, or we would have an attack with WMD's WITHIN this country, and if there is an attack with WMD's. nothing else really matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by Grizzle:

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:

He said that it is unlikely that they will be found in Iraq, and he is exactly right.

In another time and place a semantic argument might hold water, but in this case no one can be expected to believe that if they have found WMD's that they wouldn't be parading that fact around since it WAS their original reason for the invasion.

Besides, either way you cut it, in your scenario the Bush Admin comes off as blatant liars for making statements like those in the article if they aren't true. Which is a hell of a lot worse than believing they were there, only to find they weren't. Which is what they've been saying for months now.


First off, all intelligence POINTS that direction, that the WMD's are in Syria, but the intelligence agencies in this country will not say that there is proof, once bitten twice shy.

SO the Bush administration is playing it close to the vest, because as long as the intelligence agencies say they have no concrete proof, but believe that the WMD's are in Syria, Bush cannot say, hey, the WMD's are in Syria.

THe fact is that there are a number of agencies and individuals with the proof, but are not considered reliable by the intelligence agencies. Again, once bitten twice shy.

I can say, with 100% accuracy, that at least a large portion of the WMD's are in Syria, but then again, I won't be hit upside the head by every Mainstream media outlet in the world.

Or called a liar by the nuts out there that think that Bush and company are the worst thing to happen to this country since Vietnam and the Nixon administration, and are liars extraordinaire.

I won't name any names, they know who they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

ChannelNewsAsia

quote:

Syria tested chemical arms on civilians in Darfur region: press

BERLIN : Syria tested chemical weapons on civilians in Sudan's troubled western Darfur region in June and killed dozens of people.

The German daily Die Welt newspaper, in an advance release of its Wednesday edition, citing unnamed western security sources, said that injuries apparently caused by chemical arms were found on the bodies of the victims.

Advertisement

It said that witnesses quoted by an Arabic news website called ILAF in an article on August 2 had said that several frozen bodies arrived suddenly at the "Al-Fashr Hospital" in the Sudanese capital Khartoum in June.

Die Welt said the sources had indicated that the weapons tests were undertaken following a military exercise between Syria and Sudan.

Syrian officers were reported to have met in May with Sudanese military leaders in a Khartoum suburb to discuss the possibility of improving cooperation between their armies.

According to Die Welt, the Syrians had suggested close cooperation on developing chemical weapons, and it was proposed that the arms be tested on the rebel SPLA, the Sudan People's Liberation Army, in the south.

But given that the rebels were involved in peace talks, the newspaper continued, the Sudanese government proposed testing the arms on people in Darfur.

Details of what were in the weapons were not disclosed.

The Sudanese government has been accused of arming and backing Arab militias, known as Janjaweed, which have rampaged through the western Darfur region for the past 19 months.

An estimated 50,000 people have been killed and 1.4 million more uprooted in a campaign against Darfur's black African population, which began in February 2003 when Khartoum and the Janjaweed cracked down on a rebel uprising.

The United States has accused Syria of trying to acquire materials and the know-how to develop chemical weapons and claims that Sudan has been seeking to improve its capability to produce them for many years.

- AFP


Looks like Syria has been playing with it's new toys it got from Saddam.

Lovely, just lovely.

I hate terrorists, and terrorist states!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

OK, we are going to have some fun.

Look at these aeticles and tell me again that Syria does NOT have Saddam's WMD's, and their own.

Washington Times

Little stroll down memory lane, that MOST of you guys have CONVENIENTLY forgotten.

The Vanguard

The Canadian Prime minister has made a speech about the fact that it is a FACT, that terrorists now are in possession of WMD's.

Did you hear about that? NO.....

THis war in Iraq was NOT warranted?

Yeah right, how deaf do you have to be not to know that those WMD'S DID exist? there was NEVER any proof that a MAJORITY of them were destroyed, He played hide and seek with the inspectors, WHY? He kicked them out? WHY?

He played a dangerous game, and when he thought that Bush was gonna come down on him, he shipped it all out, or as much as he could, parts of missiles, which he was NOT supposed to have, have been found, chemical weapons HAVE been found in Iraq, Saddam shipped a boatload of WMD's into Syria, and now terrorists have them, this is 100% verified due to the fact that the Thwarted Jordanian attack had enough Chemical weapons to kill 30,000 people.

The weapons existed, the weapons exist, and the weapons are in the hands of terrorists, isn't that nice?

While Bush was pussyfooting around trying to give the UN a chance to show that it was still a feasible organization, Saddam started shipping it out, in job lots.

Now Kofi says it was an illegal war?

Sorry to spoil your bank account Kofi, all those food for oil kickbacks must have been making you a nice nestegg, but the fact of the matter is, the UN AUTHORIZED it. It was NOT illegal, it was AUTHORIZED.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... 0_0

please do not take the canadian government seriously.

They are simply a distraction for forigners from canada's real goal: have a good time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also from your first link:

"The United States spotted the heavy truck traffic via satellite imagery before the war. But spy cameras cannot look through truck canopies, and the ISG has not been able to determine whether any weapons were sent to Syria for hiding. "

that makes it speculation.

second link:

"[the author is] a Vice President of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies"

bias?

also:

"fact that it is a FACT"

I beleve that was our last prime minister

I think the quote was:

"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by Baloogan:

also from your first link:

"The United States spotted the heavy truck traffic via satellite imagery before the war. But spy cameras cannot look through truck canopies, and the ISG has not been able to determine whether any weapons were sent to Syria for hiding. "

that makes it speculation.

second link:

"[the author is] a Vice President of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies"

bias?

also:

"fact that it is a FACT"

I beleve that was our last prime minister

I think the quote was:

"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven."

NO, but people on the ground can, and did, and have.

We have some eyewitness's to the loadout of those trucks, and ambulances and anything else that Saddam could find with wheels.

We know the 3 locations where those weapons and missiles and other sundry items are located.

Now it is matter of getting the FULL proof, and that is getting Human intelligence INTO those facilities and figuring out how to take them out.

Problem is that Clinton and his cronies gutted our human intelligence, and so we are basically starting over from scratch. It takes 8-10 years to get good human intel placed in enemy terroritory, so it will take a while to get that info from intelligence sources, so we have to rely on less then reliable human intel right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:

NO, but people on the ground can, and did, and have.

We have some eyewitness's to the loadout of those trucks, and ambulances and anything else that Saddam could find with wheels.

We know the 3 locations where those weapons and missiles and other sundry items are located.

[/QB]

Link? And then why don't you just go to the 3 locations and get them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without further proof we can't exactly do that Baloogan, it's common sense

It's not like if the police knew three location's of crack pot planters they could just perform a raid

In this case there need's to be more proof, like the location's exact wearabouts, the force that might be protecting it. And weather or not other country's are involved in said protection

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You still fail to understand our military

The reason why won't use nuke's is because of the effect's it might have on the enviroment

Plus

There is a possibility that dropping a MOAB (what ever you call it) could escalate this problem FURTHER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

A MOAB is a fuel air explosive.

The problem with these is that they are not really bunker busters, which is what the WMD's are hidden in.

If we used a few Bunker busters and opened it up, the dropped a few MOABS on it, then it would be pretty much gone, and so would the evidence.

SO, we shall have to see how Bush handles it after the election.

Here and Hereor Here, and watch the video

This thing is indeed the mother of all bombs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here I thought MOAB only existed in Command and Conquar Generals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, come on...

The real reason that we don't use the Mother Of All Bombs is that the feminist lobby would protest associating a female monicker on the most destructive non-nuclear weapon in our arsenal, especially during an election.

Don't you guys know anything...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by Baloogan:

Who needs evidence?

y'all already took Iraq.

And for good reason too, but we have already turned over governing to them, and in the next 2 years or so, they will take TOTALY charge of their security, but we will still have troops there to help if it comes down to needing it.

Evidence is OBVIOUSLY needed, otherwise the world BASHES us for everything. We have ACTUALY WMD's that have been FOUND IN IRAQ, yet you don't hear a thing about it, We have FOUND, plans etc for the reinstitution of his WMD programs, yet you don't hear a thing about it, We have FOUND MASS graves, yet that wasn't a reason we went in, according to some, so those don't count. WE have figured out where the WMD's have gone, yet again, you don't hear a thing about that, because the "evidence" isn't good enough.

I hope after the November election, Bush stirs things up a bit, take out Iran's Nuclear plant, take out the mullahs, so that the terrorists quit getting resupplied, and then Syria.

Iran and Syria are the 2 that are left, once they are gone, terrorism wil be on it's own, NO states to finance it, no states to resuplly them, no states to brainwash them, etc, oh, and of course, I hope to see Israel deal with the Palestinians once and for all.

There be terrorists in those 3 places, and once they are taken out, the terrorists will REALLY have some problems. They are DESPERATE to not let Iraq get a Democracy, as well as Afghanistan, but it is going to happen, and the terrorists will be in a world of hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Evidence is OBVIOUSLY needed, otherwise the world BASHES us for everything. We have ACTUALY WMD's that have been FOUND IN IRAQ, yet you don't hear a thing about it, We have FOUND, plans etc for the reinstitution of his WMD programs, yet you don't hear a thing about it, We have FOUND MASS graves, yet that wasn't a reason we went in, according to some, so those don't count. WE have figured out where the WMD's have gone, yet again, you don't hear a thing about that, because the "evidence" isn't good enough."

Why do you worry about world opinion of america? Isn't that something that a democrat does?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×