US run by psychopaths

Yeah, well Im from the usa, and I say we kill them all!

Until then.... Here's to another beautiful war. Cheers! :cheers
 
iraqcartoon1.jpg


Which presents more of a danger to you, a policeman with a gun or a murderer with a gun? Missles in the hands of a dictator which can be fired at anybody on any whim are much different than missles in the hands of an elected official needing the approval of others to do anything.
 
Which presents more of a danger to you, a policeman with a gun or a murderer with a gun?

I'd liken it to a policeman with a bazooka and a murderer with a knife collection. I don't want the murderer to be free to swing his knives around, but I'm about 100 feet away from the showdown, and I'm a little worried about the shrapnel from a bazooka shot. No matter how many times the policeman tells me that he's doing this to keep everybody safe, or mentions how evil the murderer is, it's not going to make the shrapnel disappear.

Missles in the hands of a dictator which can be fired at anybody on any whim are much different than missles in the hands of an elected official needing the approval of others to do anything.

Lack of authorization doesn't magically stop a finger from flipping a switch or pushing a button. Once an arsenal is deployed, nobody sitting in an office in The Homeland is going to be able to stop it unless the man at the controls is in agreement. Abuse of trust is a bitch, just look at the history of this site...
 
Originally posted by Daniel Eriksson@Mar 8, 2003 @ 12:18 AM

So true, so true. And guess what, US is the only country that have ever used weapons of mass destruction.

Where do you get this idea from?
blink.gif
Most nuclear powers have tested these devices, but yes the United States is the only country to use an atomic weapon for an attack, which is the main reason why there is such fear of them today. Nuclear weapons, however, are not the only ones that cause mass destruction.
 
Originally posted by IceMan2k@Mar 11, 2003 @ 04:07 AM

Missles in the hands of a dictator which can be fired at anybody on any whim are much different than missles in the hands of an elected official needing the approval of others to do anything.

If that's the case, why is the Bush administration saying it will go ahead with an attack on Iraq whether it has the UN Security Council's approval or not?
 
Originally posted by Zero 9+Mar 10, 2003 @ 10:41 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Zero 9 @ Mar 10, 2003 @ 10:41 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'> <!--QuoteBegin-Daniel Eriksson@Mar 8, 2003 @ 12:18 AM

So true, so true. And guess what, US is the only country that have ever used weapons of mass destruction.

Where do you get this idea from?
blink.gif
Most nuclear powers have tested these devices, but yes the United States is the only country to use an atomic weapon for an attack, which is the main reason why there is such fear of them today. Nuclear weapons, however, are not the only ones that cause mass destruction. [/b][/quote]

Bingo.

Nukes aren't the only big threat, heck, you either need an ICBM or you have to get close. However, its easier to smuggle in smaller/better concealed weapons (ones that dont emit radiation) such as super-lethal toxins or bacteria. Just ask the Kurdish how much fun you can have with those toys.
 
Oh something else didn't the states drop both of those bombs on civilian targets and only needed at the most to drop one but they wanted to see how there toys would work????

Also bush really doesn't have any tie downs, he can push aside the security counsil and he is using the old go to war against iraq from 91? and as far as i know the president decides whether or not to use WMD's!!!!

some scarry thoughts those are.
 
Hey I just has a question pop into my head...

why don't countries try to take over other countries anymore? (like the game Risk).

I'm just curious
 
Originally posted by gamefoo21@Mar 10, 2003 @ 09:06 PM

Oh something else didn't the states drop both of those bombs on civilian targets and only needed at the most to drop one but they wanted to see how there toys would work????

Japan did not surrender until after the second bomb was dropped. It is still debateable how long the war would have gone on without those bombs, and how many US soldiers were theoretically saved, as it is all speculation.
 
You're right, we shoulda stayed out of WWII. That was pretty stupid of us. Which leads me to a rebuttal for "They'd get sanctioned all to hell". Nothing short of force could stop a serious military threat. If China formed a few alliances and decided to crush other countries, sanctions aren't going to do squat. You'd need to... *gasp* FIGHT them.

That said, in a war, you FIGHT. The Japs weren't exactly known for their delicate methods. You fight to win, if you try and fight a "limited war" you'll be screwing yourself over. It's not like we flew over to Japan and blew the crap out of their fleet. It's not like they surrendered and we hit them with another atomic bomb.
 
That said, in a war, you FIGHT. The Japs weren't exactly known for their delicate methods. You fight to win, if you try and fight a "limited war" you'll be screwing yourself over.

Be careful with that line of reasoning, it'll come back and bite you in the ass. For example, if civilians are acceptable targets it's not hard to make the leap to the idea that it's okay to kill chunks of your own country's population for the Greater Good.

It's not like they surrendered and we hit them with another atomic bomb.

The people hit by the atomic bombs did not have the option of surrender. They were, in effect, being punished for their government's military policy. Are you sure that this isn't a problematic approach to war?
 
Suicide camp opens in Iraq

DOHA, Qatar (March 11) - Saddam Hussein has opened a training camp for Arab volunteers willing to carry out suicide bombings against U.S. forces in case they invade Iraq, Arab media and Iraqi dissidents said Tuesday.

The dissidents, speaking by telephone from Jordan, said scores of Arab volunteers have gone to a special camp run by the Iraqi intelligence service near the town of al-Khalis, 40 miles northeast of Baghdad.

Most of the volunteers are Islamic activists who belong to pan-Arab groups that maintain close ties with Saddam's regime, the dissidents said on condition of anonymity.

The Qatar-based Al-Jazeera satellite television station reported Saturday that a group of Arab volunteers was being trained in urban warfare in a camp near Baghdad.

The station said its Baghdad-based reporter had visited a camp, some 15 miles northeast of the Iraqi capital, and interviewed several Arab trainees, who said they were ready for ``martyrdom,'' a euphemism for suicide attacks.

Many Muslims believe that participating with Iraqis in a possible war against invading U.S. forces is a religious duty, but such a camp is believed to be unprecedented in Iraq.

An Egyptian volunteer who identified himself only as Abu Abd al-Rahman said he traveled to Iraq secretly, leaving behind his wife and children, to join the camp. He told Al-Jazeera his venture was a ``God-blessed martyrdom-seeking mission.''

``We seek God's satisfaction. We seek victory first, and martyrdom in the cause of God second. You are well aware of what is happening against Iraq. This is clearly an injustice against an Arab, Muslim country,'' he said.

Asked about his three children, Abu Abd al-Rahman said: ``God will take care of them, and anyone who is taken care of by God will not be forgotten.''

Another volunteer identified as a Libyan called al-Sunusi told Al-Jazeera the volunteers hate the Bush administration, which he says, represents evil.

``I am not afraid. I am not afraid. I came here to carry out jihad (holy war) against the U.S. arrogance,'' he said.

A Syrian mosque preacher who gave his name as Abu Izz al-Din said he came to Iraq to attain his ``goal of martyrdom.''

``No nation can attain the weapon of martyrdom seekers, regardless of the technological and scientific advancement they might have,'' he said. ``The weapon of martyrdom-seekers is special to the Muslim nation. We will be able to confront them with this weapon, God willing.''

Diyar al-Umari, an Al-Jazeera reporter who said he visited the camp on a tour organized by the Iraqi government, described the volunteers as coming from a number of countries and political movements.

``The fighters here say that the weapons of the United States and Britain may be lethal, but they are martyrdom-seekers. In this case, they say, the U.S. forces may confront a case that is very unusual to them,'' al-Umari reported. ``Those martyrdom-seekers aspire to change the shape of the looming war.''

U.S. officials accuse Saddam of harboring weapons of mass destruction and have threatened to forcefully disarm him. The Bush administration also claims that Iraq maintains ties with radical organizations including groups with links to Osama bin Laden's terrorist network al-Qaida.

Saddam rejects the accusations and any link with bin Laden, al-Qaida or a Kurdish extremist group believed connected to the terror network.

On Monday, the highest authority in the Sunni Islamic world, the Islamic Research Center at Cairo's Al-Azhar University, declared that war against Iraq will be a ``new crusade'' compelling every Muslim to perform ``jihad.''

While opposition to a war against Iraq is strong in the Arab world, many Muslim scholars say suicide is against Islamic teachings.

03/11/03 14:10 EST

Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
 
Originally posted by IceMan2k@Mar 12, 2003 @ 06:36 PM

Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.

awwwe!!!
ohmy.gif
Did you get permission for this, Ice?

rolleyes.gif
hehe
 
Back
Top