best picture of the war so far

[saabcaptain]

it has been 12 years of trying for peace. 12 years of dozens of UN resoultions. 12 years of promises from Iraq but in the words of UN weapons inspections "less than full cooperation and deception." how much longer do we wait? how much longer do the people of Iraq suffer? how much longer to we allow Iraq the chance to gain nuclear weapons at which time we no longer can do anything?

time is up. the liberation of iraq is here, and thank god... it will save more lives then it kills, it will create more joy then misery.

 

[CitationLover]

this is the reason france sucks at war...

bidets!!!

anyone who can't wipe their own a$$ is way too lazy for war.

 

[T-Gates]

this is the reason france sucks at war...

bidets!!!

anyone who can't wipe their own a$$ is way too lazy for war.

ROFLMAO!!!!!



--03M

 

[canadflyau]

"The french are no less proud of their country and their way of life as we are with ours."

-Speak for yourself pal! I suggest finding a country to live in where you will be proud.

"did you hear anything from either the UN or US regarding them, aside from attacks over the US imposed no-fly zone? What were we doing over the last 12 years? Nothing. There has been very little in the way of diplomacy with the Iraqi goverment." (UN imposed no fly zone)

-After reading your post I realize that you are confused like many of the protesters. You state in your posts that the UN should have been given time to maintain the peace, but yet blame the US for doing nothing over the last 12 years. Your ignorence kills me... You are upset that we go and take care of the mess left by the UN but say the US didn't do enough for diplomacy.. Even you can't get it straight! You talk about the lack of US diplomacy then say we shouldn't be doing what we are independantly. By saying this even you admit the UN diplomacy is worthless if the US should have beeen doing addition diplomacy by itself on the side. Yet you feel more UN time for diplomacy is the answer NOW?WHAT THE HECK!! We are one of the countries that make up the UN, the vessel set up to deal with world events/crisis. Yet you feel that we should have been working on our own outside the auspices of the UN to diplomatically resolve the lack of compliance by SH..

So just what the heck do you want, US diplomacy or UN dipolmacy? You are very confused. Obviously you feel the UN wasn't doing an adequate job, but yet have a problem that the US didn't back down form what the UN unanimously agreed should be done way before we got to this point.

This is what I hear for the anti crowd.."The UN isn't working, do more US, do something US, oh no stop US not that way, more UN, more UN... what's wrong with more UN?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope this was a confusing post, b/c what I have decided is you can't reason with people who have no logical answer for how to get to peace and refuse to look at the big pic.. All they want to do is say anti-war rhetoric, and cause public distrurbences which occupy the time of those left for homeland security. The peace movement right now is the biggest oxymorom out there. Speaking out against the war is your protected right, even if it is senseless. But to go out and cause disturbences & get arrested and take up the time of those people trying to protect us from outside threat is criminal, and I am getting sick of watching it and reading/hearing the ungrounded attitudes that fuel it.

-Diplomacy with a leader with his track record, not possible... would you do business with Enron? Why is that?
-He lied in his declarations and when he said he complied with the UN.. That was proven when he fired the first of 7 Scuds.
-His people in liberated cities are cheering in the streets that they have been freed from the oppressive tyrant SH
-History, look at the last leader with these traits that we left alone.. Yeah every one remembers Hitler.. if not pick up a history book and be sure to read about the years before he became a real problem, in case you forgot

 

[hydroflyer]

One thing we all have to remember is that we (civilians) don't really know much. We have to get all of our information through the media....now there's a reliable source! How many times have you seen the media screw up or butcher a story? Personally I have to take what I hear with a grain of salt and trust what our president is doing. They have the information, and they have to utilize it without compromising what they have. That sure seems like great opportunity for the media to throw a twist or two into their story to make it more interesting. Now not to attack anyone, but you are debating how much diplomacy was done and whether it was enough. How much do we really know about that? If we were not there, then we had to get information that was passed down, and plenty of opportunity for it to get twisted.

 

[scubabri]

Ty Webb Said:

Hey, I understand you have an affinity for the French, but try not to let that ten minutes of passion in the men's room of a French bus station during your senior trip to Paris sway you from understanding the facts . . . . . What was his name, anyway?

It's intelligent statements like this that make me proud to be an American. I have no more affinity for the French than I do for the US. I live in the US (well, in the next couple days I will be), I'm proud to be an american.

All I am saying which is not protesting the war effort in Iraq, is that as soon as we Americans stand up as an example to the rest of the world, I firmly believe that peace will follow, it may take 50 years, but at some point, somebody has to stand up, and say NO MORE!

Yes, Saddam is a bad person, I've said it before. But the US has the best intelligence force in the world, with the best resources. How hard would it be to blockade and search vessels coming into and out of Iraq, use surveilance satellites to monitor shipments into and out of Iraq. Use strategic weapons to destroy known chemical, nuclear and biological sites?

I firmly believe that using the weapon inspectors, and using a limited military force to enforce the UN 1441 resoultion, would not only work better, be cheaper and reduce the exposure to our troops, but would also foster better relations with our allies such as france, germany and russia, because we are doing the responsible thing.

Our mission over there is to overthrow a government, something that is totally against the UN charter, as well as our own legislation. What kind of example are we setting for the rest of the world? We say the UN is ineffectual, yet we are the ones making it so by ignoring the will of the UN counsel because it is unpopular.

Again, the point that I am making is that war is to easy, especially when you have a military might such as ours. Short term, it may work, but my fear is that at some point in the future that it might rear up and bite us in the a**.

Whats the old saying, power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutly.

We are AMERICANS!! We can do better than this!! I am proud to be an American. I'm not a tree hugger, I'm not a protester, I'm not a liberal sobbing peace lover. I am a reasonable american who tries to learn from history, fix its mistakes, and move forward.

Ty Webb, I am sorry you think the way you do, and it appears to me that you must be a pretty angry person to not be able to have a civil discussion regarding opinions that may differ from your own, without throwing insults. I for one think that part of being an American, the melting pot that we are, is to recognize those differences whether they be regional, cultural or enthnical, discuss them and learn from each other.

I have a belief, and the way I believe may or may not be changed by what others think, and how they express those thoughts. Just as I read the responses to the post which started this, I am reading and learning from the views of the other people. Lets keep this civil and intelligent and factual.

Brian

 

[canadflyau]

"How hard would it be to blockade and search vessels coming into and out of Iraq, use surveilance satellites to monitor shipments into and out of Iraq. Use strategic weapons to destroy known chemical, nuclear and biological sites?

I firmly believe that using the weapon inspectors, and using a limited military force to enforce the UN 1441 resoultion, would not only work better, be cheaper and reduce the exposure to our troops,"

While I disagree with this option (and I will tell you why) I thank you for an idea.

Your idea is much like a former president tactics, a little here, a little there, little more when I need the focus off my administration. You can rent the movie "Blackhawk Down" to watch a Hollywood depection of an actual event. With out the concentrated effort you fail the people whom have been the biggest victims of the regime, the Iraqi people. I believe, and historical evidence would show, that the small limited, less tactical military action proves to be more fatal/deadly for all parties involved. In Iraq we already are getting pictures of the anti-aircraft fire that struck houses on the ground after being fired straight up, and being spun to say it was our guided weapons that hit the innocent homes. We all know better, but others..

The destruction of WMD sites can't just be bombed out and may require dismantlement, you would hate to help get a chem agent airbone with smoke. As people in the know have stated, one thing the regime does very well is discretely shipping and transporting. Many of the "vessels" are as small as briefcases carrying a small piece of weaponry that while inspected alone poses no threat, but when combined with the other briefcases... deadly.

The regime in charge is actually making monetary payments to suicide attackers families.. Unfortunately no surveilance or border patrol can stop that kind of weapon. It is a regime change that is necessary for the human rights of the Iraqi people. Maybe your idea could work on a limited scale to slowdown the connection of terrorists to the weapons produced by Iraq, but that would only further hurt the state of the suffering Iraqi people and provide them no remedy.

UN 1441 resoultion- it is not well known or publicized the steps taken by Sec Powell before the UN unanimously enacted the resolution. He specifically met individually with all the Nations and told them please do not endorse/support this resolution if you will not be willing to back this up with force, as the language of the resolution states. If you feel this way vote NO to this resolution, and obviously they did not vote NO. It was Powell who insisted on taking this route, and now he is trying to pull the 3 knives from his back.

I trust the intelligence our leaders have at their fingertips and the route they are taking. With the support of over 40 Nations this is hardly a unilateral effort. I understand how tough this decision for conflict was and don't envy their position for 1 second.

 

[Ty Webb]

It's intelligent statements like this that make me proud to be an American. I have no more affinity for the French than I do for the US. I live in the US (well, in the next couple days I will be), I'm proud to be an american.

Whatever, kid. It's called humor. Yep, I know, your French buddies have a better sense of humor- as made obvious by their affinity for Jerry Lewis movies, but try to keep things in perspective, huh?

All I am saying which is not protesting the war effort in Iraq, is that as soon as we Americans stand up as an example to the rest of the world, I firmly believe that peace will follow, it may take 50 years, but at some point, somebody has to stand up, and say NO MORE!

This makes no sense at all. Maybe you should stand up and say "NO MORE" . . . . . . . to crack.


Yes, Saddam is a bad person, I've said it before. But the US has the best intelligence force in the world, with the best resources. How hard would it be to blockade and search vessels coming into and out of Iraq, use surveilance satellites to monitor shipments into and out of Iraq. Use strategic weapons to destroy known chemical, nuclear and biological sites?

This would be outside of the mandate of the UN, too, and you would have just as much noise from the Idiot French, Germans and Russians, because you would still be going against their political and economic interests.


Ty Webb, I am sorry you think the way you do, and it appears to me that you must be a pretty angry person to not be able to have a civil discussion regarding opinions that may differ from your own, without throwing insults.

I am not angry . . . it was actually intended to be somewhat humorous. Humor is good for you. You ought to try it. Don't take yourself so seriously, kid, no one else is. Sorry what I said about the bus station bathroom. That was wrong. . . . . . . . . . what I meant to say was "train station bathroom". Again, I apologize.

I for one think that part of being an American, the melting pot that we are, is to recognize those differences whether they be regional, cultural or enthnical, discuss them and learn from each other.

Oh, please. Who wrote this- Barney, the purple dinosaur?

Look, Barney . . . . err, Brian, I am sure that your thoughts are well-intentioned, but they are not quite completely formed. Like many theories, they work only in the vacuum of Academia.

There are bigger issues at play here that will eventually become more clear. Sit back, support our guys, and if you really want to protest something, protest the French and German clowns for putting money and politics in front of principle.

 

[46Driver]

Scubabri,

We've got checkpoints at our nation's borders and we still can't keep tons of cocaines and other junk from getting in - you expect we can keep track of everything in Iraq????

You say Saddam is a bad person - lets be realistic here - how about killing 2 million of his own people, rape, torture, and anything else you care to mention - try pure, undiluted, uncompromising evil - HOW do you bring peace and freedom to Iraq without getting rid of Saddam?

You are well intentioned; but naive, unrealistic, and therefore dangerous.

 

[FlyLawyer]

Pervasive Solution