After watching CP's address to NATO this afternoon, I have come to the conclusion/s that 1) Saddam will not unconditionally surrender and 2) Nothing short of that will prevent us (The USA) from going to war in Iraq.

While I hate war and think it should always be the last resort, I feel that it is going to be necessary and soon. I also hate the thought of this madman using chemical weapons on our troops and the few countries that are not home hiding under the bed, but it will not be any easier or pleasant next year or the year after that.

I think the NATO countries that do not represent their countries in this effort should be expelled from NATO or we should quit NATO.

History is being written and this is what people are sending me. Keep laughing.

http://www.theonion.com/onion3904/north_dakota.html

 

i recently met someone in a cheat that is stationed in germany. he keeps me updated on whats going on with the war situation and well pretty much you can look forward to one. they are doing lots of training and searches.

 

I`m more concerned about those North Koreans than Saddam Insane right at this point . All I keep hearing from them is , if the US does this or that , we consider it an act of war . And they have nukes !




Jeff

 

North Korea has nukes but they are limited.

They know they are next.

I fully expect to see nukes used in Iraqi. The only way that will not happen is if (1) Israel is not attacked, and (2) Saddam does not use chemicals on the troops when we go in.

 

I do not expect to see nukes used in Iraq even in a limited way, we will control the air within minutes of the war starting and they do not have a way of lighting a nuclear weapon and throwing it at our position. Forget it, ain't gonna happen. It's not like they could do anything with a nuclear weapon that wouldn't hurt them more, we are going to be on their soil.

I do not think Korea would be so stupid as to use a nuclear weapon. You can't believe they are going to drop one on the USA, they sure as hell wouldn't drop one on their soil. China as poor as they are in the human right field would not allow a world wide nuclear war, and they (Korea) have no power w/o China.

 

You are using logic on 2 countries that do not operate or run their country in a logical manner.

I hope we don't use nukes but I think that if Saddam does do something stupid, they will be used in a limited manner so that he cannot launch a chemical warhead. Isreal and the US have both said that nukes may be called upon ("..respond with all means necessary.").

I don't think they are bluffing

 

I was listening to talk radio today while I cruised for hot chicks, and the fella on the radio (a militarian in some respect...) was asked about "Tactical Nukes" and their potential role in the war. He said that basically we would have to be ready to lose the war to whip out the Big Ugly, even in it's tiny artillary form. I am not afraid of the nuke factor in Iraq; the bio/chem weapons are much scarier than a nuke to me.
Then there's the North Koreans. I personally compare them to the kid on the playground who thinks he's hard until he gets punched in the nose. Yeah, they have a couple of nukes, but they can't get them here. And as for their huge army, they would have boats full of corpses on the bottom of the North Pacific if they tried to get them all over here. Plus, you just know that China is going to smack Kim Short Dong if he messes with their ability to get a better foothold into international trade.
I suppose I can spout all about how we have nothing to fear from these guys, but I can't get the thought of Global War out of my mind. We are going to have to fight Iraq, then N. Korea, perhaps at the same time...it really is scary.
Things are gonna change, I can feel it.
BDV

 

All N. Korea is doing is taunting us. They're like a bully on the playground that spouts big words with little or no action to back them up.

 

I personally think that Saddam is more dangerous than N. Korea. Why? I think N. Korea can be bought. They are very very poor. I think their motives may be jealousy, or anything else, but nobody really knows what makes Saddam tick, just that he is pure insanity. There just isn't anything we can give him that he wants.

Now I am NOT saying we should buy any of these yahoos off, just that I think the fact that we can or can't gives us a little clearer picture of who is more dangerous.

 

i agree with BDV, i also see scary times ahead and lots of change. but i don't agree with they can't get nukes over here. there's always a way to do something, even if its just a nuke in the trunk of a car by one of their agents. that's enough to destroy one of our cities. think about that for a tragedy. and here we are talking about the astronauts and 9/11 being sensationalized.... that is a whole different ballgame if something like that happens on american soil. i think we will be seeing more and more apprehension and fear from alot of people as time goes on with these situations. when you consider the possibilites... they are downright scary for not just us but for many countries that will be involved

 

I'll probably get torched for this, but here's a couple of questions/observations on war with Iraq.

The US claims it is going to war (and I use that term loosely, a war generally implies that you have an enemy that is at least somewhat competent) with Iraq because they have weapons of mass destruction. So do 50 some other countries, certainly not all friendly to US concerns, and certainly not all of them have spotless human rights records. So why Iraq? When was the last time you heard about African unrest or atrocities, they're still going on.

What happened to the war on terror and Osama bin Laden? They know he's alive, and likely plotting. When was the last time we heard anything about that? The supposed trigger for the entire military stance the US has taken (and which I support) has become completely overshadowed. Iraq is traditionally non-friendly to the Al-Qaeda. So again, why Iraq?

The US claims that Iraq poses a threat. To whom? I find it almost humorous that the US considers Iraq a threat. They don't have the technology to launch weapons beyond their own borders, let alone onto US soil. Al Qaeda is a threat, they've proved that, let's get back on track and round them up.

I guess my main problem with going into Iraq is with the "pre-emptive" nature of it. In the US you are considered innocent until proven guilty. Saddam is a windbag, he loves to brag and look like a tough guy. Fact is, HE WON'T ACT, he just loves to play the game. He knows very well that the retribution for any action would be swift and deadly. If he makes one wrong or aggressive move outside his borders, then I'm all for unleashing the full fury of US might on him, until then, I feel it's hard to justify.

Personally I think the US should back off and treat him like the spoiled brat acting up for attention that he is, IGNORE HIM. Publically anyway, obviously you have to keep tabs on him, but don't give him the satisfaction of knowing he's toying with the world's greatest superpower and getting away with it. The little cat and mouse games would get real old, real fast, if the cat's not interested.

I won't get into an emotional flame war on this, but I do welcome logical debate, I'm certainly not afraid to learn more on the subject and see other peoples views.

Waxy

 

All of these are valid points. A friend of mine insists that a few brave men should go in and kill Saddam and be done with it. It might sound cheaper but I doubt if they could get to him and it would leave all of his henchmen in place.

After we take this piece of human trash out, how much are we going to spend rebuilding his country and how long are our tropps going to be stuck there? How much will that cost?

I'm thinking of the Korean Police Action some five decades ago, and we are still over there, still spending tons of money in their society and the North Koreans coffers, and the President of South Korea rode the tide of anti-American sentiment into office. Don't you just love that?

Don't you wish we would have spent the money on our school system or something that might have paid benefits and let North Korea eat South Korea for lunch?

 

Got to say that I agree with most of what you say, even so it's a tough one to call for us comfy cozy computer using contented truck loving guys behind the wall of America with the biggest guns on the planet. Kind of makes it easy to be critical but it is a good place to be till the SMALL POX comes knocking. Let's hope the big boys really know what they are doing.

 

Today I read about the proof of direct links between Sadaam city and obl agents. That takes care of that point. We are actively pursuing the war on terror by going after not Iraq specifically, but Sadaam.

Also there has been mention of several heavy skirmishes in Afghanistan lately. Just because we don't hear about it doesn't mean it isn't happening.

I believe there is an immediate danger in letting Sadaam and his forced scientific slaves do their thing. I also believe that our government has much more information than they are delivering to us.

As far as why Iraq instead of NK, and other countries, I believe that once the elevation of Baghad is a constant number, (say 10 feet) the bullies from the other countries will go back into their caves for awhile.

On the converse, if we do nothing about Iraq, there will be a new bully on the globe every week, buying and building weapons of. if not mass destruction, at least blackmail.


I think we've waited too long already.

 

Sorry, I'm not sure what obl means. As far as I know the US hasn't been able to connect Saddam with Al Qaeda.

Quote:

On the converse, if we do nothing about Iraq, there will be a new bully on the globe every week, buying and building weapons of. if not mass destruction, at least blackmail.

I'm not sure what you mean by bully. To be a bully you must be a legitimate threat.

Who is Iraq bullying? Do you as an American feel bullied by Saddam? In what way? I agree that he bullies the people of Iraq, but how does that truly affect you?

As an analogy, the Canadian government has passed a gun registration bill I don't agree with, by nature of our electoral system, there is little or nothing I can do about it. Am I being bullied by my government? Is that action bullying the US? I realize that my inconvenience and people's lives are apples and oranges, but do you get my point?

Take a look at the actions of a bully. Picking on someone you've singled out because you don't like them or the way they do things, then doing whatever you like, with force, despite the will of others, in a confrontation in which you are clearly superior. Ringing any bells here? Partly earned, partly not, in most of the world the US is viewed as being the biggest bully on the block.

Try to put Iraq, and the middle east for that matter, in terms of your personal experience and beliefs. If you had certain beliefs or possessions (say, the right to bear arms), and someone comes along that doesn't like you and wants to take what you have because you might be a threat to them. Would you call that person a bully? Would you not attempt to defend yourself and your rights by any means possible?

Waxy