Who actually wants US to go to war?

[CrazyPyroPunk99]

Im just wondering who actually wants to attack Iraq now, with the false document the US has been using, the economic depression, and the fact that no one wants to help?

[IndecentXposure]

At 3/9/03 06:12 PM, CrazyPyroPunk99 wrote: Im just wondering who actually wants to attack Iraq now, with the false document the US has been using, the economic depression, and the fact that no one wants to help?

38 countries are behind the U.S. Never heard of any "false document."In the end, a war usualy ends up being beneficial and help economies. I'm not saying thats why the U.S. is going but you can't use "economic depression" as an excuse not to go now.

[JMHX]

Great Britain
Spain
Bulgaria

Heh. 38 indeed.

[IndecentXposure]

At 3/9/03 09:17 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: Great Britain
Spain
Bulgaria

Heh. 38 indeed.

That's on the security council. There are 35 other United Nations member states and countries outside the U.N. that have either expressed or are lending support for the U.S.

[Commander-K25]

Sad as it may be, war often does foster innovation and economic growth.

As for whether anyone "wants", certainly not. Nevertheless, it will most probably come anyway.

[JMHX]

At 3/9/03 11:41 PM, Commander-K25 wrote: Sad as it may be, war often does foster innovation and economic growth.

As for whether anyone "wants", certainly not. Nevertheless, it will most probably come anyway.

Yeah, that's the depressing truth. War for the economy.

[D2Kvirus]

Personally, I think that if Bush is so intent on dragging everyone into war, he should live by his own words. Just drop him in the Iraqi desert with an M16 and as much ammo as he can carry, and tell him to go and defend America's Democracy, or whatever spin they're using this week.

[JMHX]

On a serious note: I understand that the President is one of the most important officials in the United States, and he can't go riding into battle with his troops like, say, Julius Caesar had. However, it's a nice thought. Bush was an Air Force pilot back in the day, and although it would take muchos training to get him fit in the cockpit of a fighter, it would be an amusing and patriotism rousing thing to do. Bush leading the charge on Iraq. Heh. I think I'll write a story about it.

[iWalker]

At 3/10/03 10:32 AM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: On a serious note: I understand that the President is one of the most important officials in the United States, and he can't go riding into battle with his troops like, say, Julius Caesar had. However, it's a nice thought. Bush was an Air Force pilot back in the day, and although it would take muchos training to get him fit in the cockpit of a fighter, it would be an amusing and patriotism rousing thing to do. Bush leading the charge on Iraq. Heh. I think I'll write a story about it.

yeah it would be amusing, but get real. it would never happen ... today most of the "great" leaders are chickens

[lapslf]

Well, it would be a lot better if those "leaders" fight just each other indivudially, or they just play cards to decide who's the winner. That would save a lot of pain and tears.

passion to kill

[panik]

I do, If they need me I'll end up signing up myself if it comes down to it.

[D2Kvirus]

At 3/10/03 02:06 PM, panik wrote: I do, If they need me I'll end up signing up myself if it comes down to it.

How about they send panik into Bagdhad with an M16, as much ammo as he can carry, and a Stars and Stripes stapled to his forehead? Surely a great move for world peace all 'round...

[RandomFreak]

Do I want to? No I think this is the worst possible time for it. We need to focus on the economy and trying to calm things down in North Korea.

[JMHX]

North Korea is a bad word. Don't say it. Don't say Osama bin Laden either. You'll vanish from your house at night and never be seen again.

[Numnuts500]

At 3/9/03 11:41 PM, Commander-K25 wrote: Sad as it may be, war often does foster innovation and economic growth.

This is hardy a "war" in that sense. It's more like a mission, with an inferior enemy that would get blasted to shit and then we go home feeling good about ourselves. Bush and the military will do nothing in this war that will stimulate the economy or innovation, it's just a "blast you to shit" mission that will end faster then it started. I have nothing against going to war, I just have yet to find one REASON why we should go to war, especially now.

[JMHX]

Why do you think we're avoiding North Korea? We want a "war" that we can just roll through and take what we need; flex our muscles a bit to keep the world in order and make it look like we're doing something.

[kremlorn]

So what? Bush wants to get rid of a dictator and that s fine with me. I dont really care what reason he is doing it for. I dont care about the oil, the diversion from other matters. What is important is that in the end, a savage dictator is removed from power. Everyone benefits.

If it was up to these whiny Europeans nothing would ever be accomplished. Seriously, they cant even take care of things in their own back yard (Balkans) and they are going to tell the US how to act in its presumed national defense.

Who knows? Maybe Iraq does have NBC weapons or maybe it doesnt. Either way, a dictator is removed. I dont see why anyone is complaining. Oh right, the whole innocent Iraqi population thing. Well, who is placing them around military installations? Not the US. If they are killed, they are killed as much by Saddam as the physical bomb that falls on them. The guy isnt stupid. He knows that if he can get the US to kill some civilians by accident, the oh so gallant Europeans and the rest of the muslims will see him as a victim and a saint. Seriously, sometimes it makes me sick just thinking about it.

[Jlop985]

You know, the world would be a better place without Saddam, but we got to convince the rest of the world about that too. You have to question Bush's motives though. He's trying to fight an oil war. Want proof? Just check out the situation with North Korea. Bush isn't doing a damn thing, cause they ain't got no damn oil.

[esj]

i dont know... i am for removing saddam, any way possible. but bush's decisions piss me the hell off. if we go to war allright, if not, allright. but either way something has to be done to solve this situation. its been 12 years now and saddam hasnt done anythign he said hed do, he is playing us like a scottish man does his bag pipe. it is one big verbal "im better then you" war. meanwhile we have innocents in the u.s. and kuwait. not knowing what will be next due to the puppeteering by saddam for his country and bush to ours. there is no doubt bush wants iraq's oil, what for we will never know cause the goverment is royally f**k'ed up like that. some say its to support the war fund others say its to sell to other countries to boost our economy. we will never know. and yet so many support the decisions they have no idea how the outcome will be. as far as korea.. i have no clue what the hell the deal is with that. they say the u.s. threatens nucelear war on them. how can we fight 2 wars at once? is it me or is this INSANE? either way youve got to wonder if the u.s. is as bad as they say. can we do this? how many innocents are we going to lose? what will become of iraq and the united states in post-war? what erk's me even more, is you know that george junior is covering up george senior's mistake. unfortunately we have someone with more pride then leadership in the big chair. each day, 1 day closer to the DEADLINE people start to wonder are we okay? how much duct tape and visqueen (plastic) will we need? another large ploy to frighten americans into spending more money out of their pockets. i hate to break it to you, if a nuke hits the u.s. duct tape and plastic wont stop it... your gunna need a HOLE 50 feet in the ground if you want a fair chance and about 10 years worth of totinos pizza and yoohoo (my personal nuclear fallout selections) to even think about it. getting away from the point.. there really is no point this world is way to confused by following the media and protestors on what kinda decision is going to be made. how do you decide the fate of humans behind a chair of billions of people?!

[D2Kvirus]

At 3/11/03 10:33 PM, kremlorn wrote: If it was up to these whiny Europeans nothing would ever be accomplished. Seriously, they cant even take care of things in their own back yard (Balkans) and they are going to tell the US how to act in its presumed national defense.

We were doing quite fine in two World Wars, thank you very much. Didn't you know, it was the Russains that broke the Nazi's backs, not the US. You get credit for Japan, but we were too neurotic and passive to invade. Sorry, we'll try harder in the next one; when are you starting it, again?

As for the Balkans; which conflict? The 1992 one, or the televised one in '99? I seem to recall we were doing most of the cleaning up for the former, while the latter saw NATO dealing out most of the damage. And it wasn't the US that desposed Milosevic, but the population of Serbia. Just like the Romanians disposed (not a typo) of Ceaucescu, and if you want to get truly historic, the French of Louis XVI. What would you do if you had a mad, power hungry dictator ruling your country with an iron fist? back down and act meekly. You already are.

Who knows? Maybe Iraq does have NBC weapons or maybe it doesnt. Either way, a dictator is removed. I dont see why anyone is complaining. Oh right, the whole innocent Iraqi population thing. Well, who is placing them around military installations? Not the US. If they are killed, they are killed as much by Saddam as the physical bomb that falls on them. The guy isnt stupid. He knows that if he can get the US to kill some civilians by accident, the oh so gallant Europeans and the rest of the muslims will see him as a victim and a saint. Seriously, sometimes it makes me sick just thinking about it.

You're "thinking" about it? Please, you're parrotting about it. Can't you just elect one guy for every message board on the net, rather than have 20-odd people spout the EXACT same slogans time and again? It would save time, really it would.

[esj]

i take it your not from the u.s. which means that your opinions are that of a f**k'ing retard considering all other countries like france germany and russia arent behind us im guessing your one from of those countries. we spout off what we want to here without assholes like you to respond and give consturctive critisism. guess what!? constructive critisism from assholes like you is not needed.

[mysecondstar]

At 3/12/03 01:17 PM, esj wrote: i take it your not from the u.s. which means that your opinions are that of a f**k'ing retard considering all other countries like france germany and russia arent behind us im guessing your one from of those countries. we spout off what we want to here without assholes like you to respond and give consturctive critisism. guess what!? constructive critisism from assholes like you is not needed.

that is not at all appropriate. you think that anyone that doesn't share your opinions should not be allowed to talk? you are the embodiment of ignorant Americanism who have no regard for the opinions of the world. you just continue along your ignorant, unenlightened state not wanting to know the opinions of others and to, maybe, sway their opinion to your favor. but no, you have to be all gung ho and go at it alone and not accept anyone else's ideas. it's no wonder why so many countries dislike the US. and you aren't helping.

[D2Kvirus]

At 3/12/03 01:17 PM, esj wrote: i take it your not from the u.s. which means that your opinions are that of a f**k'ing retard considering all other countries like france germany and russia arent behind us im guessing your one from of those countries. we spout off what we want to here without assholes like you to respond and give consturctive critisism. guess what!? constructive critisism from assholes like you is not needed.

Excuse me, but since when were your opinions remotely important?

If people like you truly represent the opinions of the US, is it any wonder most of the planet hates your country? You can't even do a little research for a start. Such as;

1. The Nazis were strong until their invasion of Russia. That is what cost them most, as they managed the remarkable feat of deciding it was a good idea to incur the wrath of Stalin, and the world's largest army at the time.

2. NATO didn't do shit in Serbia. They bombed Kosovo, which was both the wrong country AND the place they were supposed to be pro-tect-ing, and went home when the ratings of the daily bombing went down. The population themselves rose up, dragged Milosevic from his office, and that is why he's in a War Crimes trial.

3. The US didn't lift a finger over Romania of Ceaucescu.

4. My profile definatly says "England." Care to read it, you dumb little prick?

5. The forum title says "Politics", not "A bunch of fucking rednecks that don't have the balls to actually join the army, even if they were old enough, but like to watch a good war on Tv and cheer, because they don't even know where it is, but they're a bunch of filthy Arab scum anyway."

6. The day you manage some constructive criticism, i'll personally come over to Palm Beach and give you a trophy. Until then, refrain from typing pathetic rants.

[TheEvilOne]

At 3/13/03 11:41 AM, D2KVirus wrote:

At 3/12/03 01:17 PM, esj wrote: i take it your not from the u.s. which means that your opinions are that of a f**k'ing retard considering all other countries like france germany and russia arent behind us im guessing your one from of those countries. we spout off what we want to here without assholes like you to respond and give consturctive critisism. guess what!? constructive critisism from assholes like you is not needed.

Excuse me, but since when were your opinions remotely important?

If people like you truly represent the opinions of the US, is it any wonder most of the planet hates your country?

People like him don't represent the US. He is just a moron. I sometimes like to say that some members of the anti-war movement are unintelligent and uninformed, but they don't have a monopoly on idiots. There are those who say they support war but really have no idea what they are talking about.

You can't even do a little research for a start. Such as;

1. The Nazis were strong until their invasion of Russia. That is what cost them most, as they managed the remarkable feat of deciding it was a good idea to incur the wrath of Stalin, and the world's largest army at the time.

Not to mention the harsh Russian winter. It seems like every invasion of Russia is doomed to failure.

2. NATO didn't do shit in Serbia. They bombed Kosovo, which was both the wrong country AND the place they were supposed to be pro-tect-ing, and went home when the ratings of the daily bombing went down.

And we can blame Bill Clinton.

[JMHX]

At 3/12/03 01:17 PM, esj wrote: i take it your not from the u.s. which means that your opinions are that of a f**k'ing retard considering all other countries like france germany and russia arent behind us im guessing your one from of those countries. we spout off what we want to here without assholes like you to respond and give consturctive critisism. guess what!? constructive critisism from assholes like you is not needed.

Just because someone isn't from the United States doesn't make their opinions any less than anyone elses. Thinking that is what makes the world view us as arrogant, bullheaded Americans who only value the opinions of people in their own country.

[Speechless]

This whole war is a cheap excuse for USA to get all and everyone else to lose all.

[mysecondstar]

At 3/13/03 01:29 PM, Speechless wrote: This whole war is a cheap excuse for USA to get all and everyone else to lose all.

sheesh. explain yourself. get all and lose all what? what do you feel is the American agenda?

[Black-Guy]

Yes, we need the war. It fuels the economy. War pools technology to the max. Besides, people are at their best when at war. As men we need to prove ourself.

[NEMESiSZ]

Anyone who's against war isn't intelligent and hasn't put any thought into his opinion.