View Full Version : War with Iraq
Should we be involved with the war on Iraq, whats your views and ideas on the current situation?
we should go to war with iraq, as if we do my modern studies disseratation becomes very easy because of the massive split it'll cause in the Labour Party and Parliament etc.
what;s this i hear? Innocent people dying, PFFT. i want my A.
Sometimes some "positive action" is required. It's all well and good closing the stable door after the horse has bolted, but it's too late - espescially when you're talking nuclear war. Get in there and sort it out once and for all I reckon.
Who are we to tell Iraq what they can and can't do?
If anybody believes that this is anything but Wubbya protecting his oil then they're living in a dreamworld and reading the sun too much. Irag wouldn't dare use nukes even if they had them, they know that we would retaliate. Regardless of what the sun says, they're not all a bunch of suicide candidates waiting to die for the good cause.
There are a lot worse terrorists around, that in theory we are supposed to be fighting since we declared the "war on terror". How many troops have we sent to spain to fight the ETA, they killed a damn sight more people than the iraquis last year, or could it possibly be that the US doesn't rely on spain for discounted oil and cheap petrol at home? Don't misunderstand me, Spain was just one of many examples, I love the place.
PS.. nice thread Kynoch, should get a good respnse for a new forum:D
hehe, i thought this would get some instant responses.
Like the states started on Afghanistan, they played for abit then it diminished i wonder why??
Maybe because they dont have any natural resources for the states to leach. :D
I have mixed feeling about this but one of the things that bothers me, is that, no properly democratic country has ever started a war and this feels like an exception. Also, history shows very few examples where people who start a war, finally win it!
On the WMD front, if Saddam had them he might use them but the targets would be local. Also, he must know that, for forty years, the U.S.A. has only had one policy for dealing with an attack on them using weapons of mass destruction - whatever type - they would respond disproprtionately and since they only really have one type of WMD, anyone who uses WMD on America would get nuked, big time.
On the oil front, of course it's important. I don't understand why people act so surprised - or upset - you'd prefer to fight for unimportant reasons?
Most wars in the past have been fort over Land, religion, unopposed views etc.
This was is supposedly against terrorism, so how does oil come into it.
Our fuel prices have risen and we aitn even at war yet, the government is using this as an excuse to raise fuel prices.
The majority of our oil comes from Kuwait which is not involved in the conflict so why should oil prices rise all of a sudden.
If we do even re capture the oil fields in Iraq you cant believe that fuel prices will drop.
The governemt will lower prices my a couple of pence per litre to keep the general public happy, but they will be raking in major profits that we wont see get put into good causes like the NHS etc.
Dead_One
19-01-2003, 23:24
if you dig deep enough, most wars are down to religion.
money sometimes comes into it, but religion is usually up there somewhere as a cause.
there, a very tame first post from me in this forum....
ling_thing
19-01-2003, 23:48
well here's what bush has to say on the matter - well kind of
video clip (http://www.asu.net/bsh/union.wmv/)
wizard_uk
19-01-2003, 23:56
But do we know the real reason behind invading Iraq? I'm not saying there's a conspiracy theory or anything.
I've heard it may be to do something with a huge oil pipeline they have.
I'm not saying I believe that at all.
Do we trust anything that the politicians say?
Will we ever see this dossier from Iraq? No.
We are just taking Bush and Blairs word for what is contained within.
For too long we have been following blindly what the politicians are telling us.
That's the way of the world Wizard! It's best to read more of the international press for a more balanced view, look at some french, spanish, german and then asian papers or websites. It's amazing what you learn that nver gets published over here.
We see what we're supposed to see, and also tainted with the writers slant on things as well.
wizard_uk
20-01-2003, 00:05
Originally posted by conan
That's the way of the world Wizard! It's best to read more of the international press for a more balanced view, look at some french, spanish, german and then asian papers or websites. It's amazing what you learn that nver gets published over here.
We see what we're supposed to see, and also tainted with the writers slant on things as well.
Unfortunately it is, that's why I tend to distrust most that is written in the newspapers. Thats one of the reasons why I don't read them that much now.
I just tend to read them for amusement nowadays.
stay away from the tabloids, and stik with the borad sheets, alot better, more accurate, and professionally written up.
master baits
20-01-2003, 01:05
Rather than the religion the true cost of all wars is human greed plain and simple , it has however been disguised in the name of religion , freedom etc add your affix here.
Bush and his cronies really worry about the de stabilising of the economy in that region , primarily because it drives most of its own and in the case of afghanistan it has massive oil reserves in a pipeline area.
It was for that reason the govts of usa and gb fired him up with the tools to do it as their friend in the 80s (iran incidents), perhaps thats why they know how much of the dodgy weapons he has.
The other reason is hopefully the lessons learned in europe in the 30s by allowing one man to build up and promise peace before invasion and destabilising europe in the same way.
it cant be called war until america wins it, if there is a 'conflict' where america is involved in and loses its NOT A WAR!!:E
All in all Bush scares me more than the Iraqi Administration, I think he has a personal agenda ie proving something to his father.
It's a culture thing isn't it? Just because we live in a western world 'democracy' doesn't mean that 'middle eastern' culture is wrong, for instance western women sometimes dress in 'sexy clothes to attract a male partner, how they dress is dictated very much by 'hollywood fashion', films and the like, but middle eastern women cover their whole body and their face.
Now, who really is the slaves here, the fashion followers or the people who follow their religion?
tough question really!
The American role in all of this seems to me that of the school bully who tries to convince the playground that his action are right when beating up a small kid who dared to cheek him.
I can't help but think if Saddam had been Russian and it had happened maybe 20 years ago the Americans would have ignored it, not because it wasn't happening, but because they would have feared a proper enemy that had the ability to retaliate.
They say that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, well don't the Americans have this ability too? Yeah and much more of it.
The Americans remain the only country on Earth that have ever used atomic weapons in conflict, and that unfortunately was more of a warning to the Russians than an attack on Japan!
The Americans are undoubtedly the warmongers here, as usual
heaven help us:(
hope it never happens :confused:
wizard_uk
20-01-2003, 08:05
Originally posted by scottie
I think he has a personal agenda ie proving something to his father.
You could imagine the conversation between Bush Sr and Bush Jr
Bush Sr: Now listen son, I don't want you to be a big screw up like me and let Saddam get away.
Bush Jr: Don't worry daddy, I wont screw up at all.
Bush Sr: You'd better not do, or your not welcome around here anymore.
Bush Jr: Alright daddy, can I go and play with my bestest buddy in the whole wide world, Tony.
Herminator
20-01-2003, 09:02
Wow serious topics in this forum now.
Well oil prices haven risen to very very high prices recently, just over $30 a barrel, but this is mainly down to Venisuala (god knows how to spell it) having a huge oil strike, they process an awful lot of oil. That and Opec controling production levels, which they raised a little to make up for the strike.
Saddam is an evil dictator, he's been in power for something like 25years now and the people have had no chance to get rid of him, despite the poverty he's created for the masses. If anyone dares speak badly about him they are taken away by the military and often never seen again. There's military on every street and always follow news reporters around to intimedate the people they interview.
I don't like the idea of a full out war on Iraq, too many civilians would get injured and there will be the usual conflict within the UN and US as to what targets to hit and how long to attack them. If they do go down this route the UN has to grow some balls and finish Saddam off once and for all.
It would be much better to send in some group like the SAS and either extract Saddam or kill him and the top 20 or so guys around him. This would be difficult but in overall loss of life it would be better. Although the political implications are hard to guess at.
It's not like I am a fan of Bush, he should of stuck to finishing off Osama Bin Laden and his forces. The US live up to the belief that Americans are thick all too often. They set their own rules on pollution levels and recycling just because they only care about their own economy, they think they can have everything their way.
youve got 2 identical paragraphs in there Herm lol.:)
Yeh i thought id start a serious discussion, working well upto now.
I can't help but think if Saddam had been Russian and it had happened maybe 20 years ago the Americans would have ignored it, not because it wasn't happening, but because they would have feared a proper enemy that had the ability to retaliate.
Exactly that is happening now. North Korea has openly re started a nuclear weapons programme and thrown out all out its inspectors and openly declared that any economic sanctions will be considered an act of war. Yet the Americans have made no threats of war here at all. Infact there are suggestions they are going to give North Korea more aid to persuade them to stop their programme again. Considering both Iraq and North Korea were in the same "axis of evil" why such a disparity in approach?
Hmmm should I show this thread to an insane friend? One who enjoys conspiracy theories, rants, and goes to anti war protests wearing a "Don't attack Iraq" badge? I think not, we will be here all day :D
Oil oil oil, it's all about oil. In 50 years it's going to run out and we're all doomed. End of story. More info? Google it.
K Hussain
21-01-2003, 00:24
bush
"The problem with the French is that they have no word for entrepreneur" - Bush
K Hussain
21-01-2003, 00:33
what does entrepreneur mean?
The Pimp
21-01-2003, 01:43
Send all the asylum seekers to fight the war for us. We then kill 2 birds with one stone and rid the country of the fake immigrants who are just here for monetary issues and also we don't lose any of out elite troops when the American's use friendly fire. The ones that are still left alive after the war has ended can be left behind. By the way the news has been recently, we wouldn't have to worry about arming the asylum seekers as they already own their own weapons.
war=deaths, so i believe that everything should be done to avoid it in the first place..Innocence will always suffer
I believe they should have pursued Sadam the last time.. The vehicles were there, the troops were there, but it all just fizzled out????
Personally i would be very worried about North Korea..
I am sure Bush believes that he could take them both on at the same time..
Definatley concerning..
Oil does not figure too much in this conflict.
However when the Iran Iraq war was going on Kuwait did not use any of its own oil resources. Instead it stole all of its oil exports from Iraq, and thats why Iraq invaded Kuwait.
Now Religion, thats a different matter. Guess which is the only country that Saddam has threatend and vowed to obliterate, (remember the super gun, it only pointed in one direction), yup thats right Israel. Now don't things seem to fall into place a bit easier when Israel is mentioned.
And as for North Korea, well that really would be a messy buisiness the second time around, best keep out of that one Jr.
K Hussain
24-01-2003, 00:46
Its religion more than anything.
Yesterday it was Afghanistan (a Muslim country)
Today it's Iraq (another Muslim country)
The US has been supporting from the beginning and still supports Israel’s military actions against Palestine (yet another Muslim country).
*Removed by The Pimp*
Da_Rebel
28-01-2003, 13:43
Originally posted by Dead_One
if you dig deep enough, most wars are down to religion.
Exactly. Religion is the single biggest killer in the world today. Psychos like Bin Laden who get ppl to fly into building to prove his point "My God is better than your God".
Those guys believed if they died for their beliefs they would be rewarded in the afterlife.
What kind of F*CK3D up God says "Kill thousands of innocent ppl to claim your place in heaven/valhalla/wherever the hell they go"
PS - Where [i]do[i] they go?
Da_Rebel
28-01-2003, 15:14
I heard America don't really get much oil from Iraq. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Iraq doesnt sell any of its oil atm, our oil comes from the neighbouring country Kuwait.
The states has its own supply of oil though, i know they get a small quantity from kuwait also.
K Hussain
28-01-2003, 23:02
Originally posted by Da_Rebel
Exactly. Religion is the single biggest killer in the world today. Psychos like Bin Laden who get ppl to fly into building to prove his point "My God is better than your God".
Those guys believed if they died for their beliefs they would be rewarded in the afterlife.
What kind of F*CK3D up God says "Kill thousands of innocent ppl to claim your place in heaven/valhalla/wherever the hell they go"
PS - Where [i]do[i] they go?
As far as I know there is not one religion in the world which's beliefs is to kill innocent people to earn their place in paradise.
From a Muslims point of view the 9/11 tragedy was totally wrong and there was noting right about it. So Bin Laden being a Muslim would not do such a thing.
johnwibble
04-02-2003, 10:30
I think we have to be there to give the Americans some troops on their own side to shoot at as usual.
Cable Monkey
04-02-2003, 14:19
I have read this thread, and there are elements of it I am unhappy with. However there seems some confusion as to why war with Iraq will happen while it won't with North Korea. Primarily the Iraqis stand alone. They will not have the physical assistance of any other country, though many will offer vocal support for domestic political purposes. The Korean War (which incidentally is still officially on) was bought to stalemate by the active involvement of the Chinese. The only country who cannot be physically threatened by the US. Korea's big brother will not let anything happen to its little sibling and the US will keep a discreet physical distance and offer anything the Koreans want in order to get them to comply. Iraq has no big brother, and maybe if they had they would have been better behaved in the past.
Regarding the events of the last war, the US never pushed their advantage to the max, because part of the deal they struck with the local countries was that there would be no occupation of Iraq for anything other than tactical advantage. Saddam also pulled the accidental masterstroke of not fighting back when the US troops went into Kuwait. The Yanks felt that if they pushed their domination any further they would have been embarrassed. Colin Powell described the possible effects as being 'unchivalrous' in the eyes of local countries! In short Bush Senior fought a P.R. war instead of the all out annihilation it should have been (in military terms).
I think Junior is simply going back to set the record straight.
I think going to war with Iraq has its plus points. I just think the major super-powers are going about it the wrong way.
It seems to me that Saddam is of the ilk of Hitler, hes a coward who uses his people as pawns in a big game of chess. The people of Iraq are an oppressed people, who are scared to stand upto the oppression they live with day after day. And by golly are they right to be scared. Speaking up about him in public normally means Saddams secret police turn up and take away every member of your family and have them tortured and killed infront of your very eyes. Its public knowledge that when the Iraqi world cup team were kicked out of the cup they were tortured on returning to Iraq.
I was under the impression that this sort of thing was not allowed anymore, or does being a head-of-state allow you to be a genocidal maniac, and allow you to kill as many of your own people as you want without redress from the world community?
Are we supposed to just turn a blind eye?
There is huge vasts of wealth in Iraq in oil fields and in Saddams Palaces, this wealth should be there for the people but it isn;t because Saddam uses is as a leesh around their necks.
It could be used by the people of Iraq to rebuild the country into a free domocratic state in the future. Whether that would work is another question altogether....but the people of Iraq deserve that chance. These people know nothing but war and suffering, because Saddam puts them in the firing line so often.
I'd like Bush and Blair to just come out and say "we know Saddams got weapons of mass destruction because we sold them to him" and then go into Iraq to free the people from the evil dictator that he is.
I`m certain when U.S. and British tanks roll into Baghdad the flags they were burning this week on tv will become the flags the Iraqi people will be waving.
Thats if George W and Mr Blair don't start world war 3 first.
have u seen this?
http://www.daviesr.freeserve.co.uk/
:rolleyes:
You know how SKY News has "press the red button on your remote" to vote etc.etc....
Well I suggest having a "Press the red button on your sky remote and launch a cruise missle at Baghdad"
you may laugh........but I'd just have to have a go.
maybe a few goes......
Thought this Simulation of World war 2.5 couldn't be more correct.
http://www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml
Schvetty
20-02-2003, 10:46
its BUSH that the MAD person
Sadam only has oil and Bush want it all
Its got bugger all to do with oil.
America has no interest in Iraq's oil, they've already said they will hold Iraq's oil in trust for the Iraqi people when they take Iraq.
Simply because they don't want to take the oil. America know there is enough asset in Oil in Iraq to rebuild it. However if Iraq produce too many barrels per day of oil or sell too much the price of oil will fall.
It will fall anyway when the war starts next week, but in time the oil could rebuild iraq into a damn good country a country with a fighting chance of survival and a chance at democracy to.
Just to help clear up a few misconceptions.
The U.K. does not get much oil from Kuwait. Manchester gets a bit each month, but not a lot. Most of the Kuwait output goes to central Europe, Scandinavia and Japan.
The U.S. may have it's own oil, but no where near enough for it's glutinous use. It relies heavily on South America, Nigeria and above all Saudi Arabia. (It has always puzzled me as to why the offshore oil unloading ports in the Gulf of Mexico have never been targeted by extremists. You would not believe how busy they are, or how reliant the U.S. is on them.)
And as for the last Gulf war, the U.N. mandate called for removing U.S. troops from Kuwait. It did not justify any military invasion of Iraq. Thats why Colin Powell was held on a leash by JB Snr. He sure seems anxious to continue where HE left off.
The simulation of WW 2.5 certainly sums up the feelings of those countries in the Gulf region, notice how any Kuwati with money is in the Uk or Florida at the moment!
johnwibble
06-04-2003, 22:59
If I hear the phrase "pockets of resistance" once more I'm going to smash the telly up
lol just found this site, the guy who does "jam" made this movie.
You have to dl it and watch it, it isnt directly related to this thread, its more of a Bush p**s take.
http://www.thesmokehammer.com/
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.