Bush's Ultimatum: War Begins on 3/19/03?

Remove all ads!

I liked the part in that about the restraint the U.S. has shown. It became clear after 9/11 that the world thinks the U.S. is emasculated -- that they can be attacked, defied, insulted and otherwise abused without them doing anything because they are paralyzed with the "liberal guilt" all successful Westerners should feel. That feeling is being put to rest. I have said it before, and I'll say it again. Hussein never, not once, complied with the terms of the cease fire. There is also evidence, believed by much of the world, and not just the suppposedly stupid and brainwashed Americans, that Hussein has financed terrorist acts. It may be considered wrong to take steps to defend yourself in some circles, but not where I come from. I think a parallel with the schoolyard is appropriate -- the smaller kids taunt, abuse and torture the big kid, and they get away with it. As soon as the big kid gets tired of it and defends himself, THAT'S when the teacher comes along and accuses him of being a bully.

I think Bush is a drip, I've said that clearly, but I support the U.S. actions, no question. In a strange paradox, I also support my government's refusla to send military support -- the Americans don't really need any military aid to defend themselves, and I figure they should showcase that ability to deter the next folks who want to terrorize the West.

 

Everything posted about what happened on 9/11, I agree with. But I cannot ask it enough -- what does this war in Iraq have to do with 9/11? If there is REAL evidence that Saddam is behind the attack, then I support this war, just as I supported the war in Afganistan. But despite round the clock coverage and accusations by the media and the conservatives (they now run the media anyway), I have yet to see one shred of evidence.

As for the conservative rhetoric now: I remember this line from a conservative newscaster when Bill Clinton ordered the attack on Bin Ladin's camp in Afganistan, long before 9/11 -- "Why should we fire a million dollar cruise missle just to blow up a tent in the desert." If it had been five hours earlier 9/11 may never have even happened.

 

Chandos, I don't know or care if Hussein had anything to do with 9/11 -- in fact, I'm pretty sure he didn't. But he has in the past, and is almost surely now, funding other terrorists and terrorist activities. That's why we need to smash him like the bug he is.

 

Well, that'd make for some interesting politics when the UK invaded the US because that's where the IRA were funded from for the last 35 years. Still are as such, but at least the political process is now taking precedence over bombing campaigns.

Oh yeah, more people have been killed in the last 35 years in the UK and Northern Ireland because of this than were killed in the attacks on 9/11.

Just something that should be borne in mind when all of a sudden the US have now seen terrorism up close. We had to live with it for years, and it was funded by your fellow citizens.

 

Well, what I really don't like about certain Americans, the american Media and surely the Bush-Adminstration is their cheap Propaganda.

As someone put it in a Television show I watched lately, at least they could have the decency to put some thought in it. The Propaganda they usally serve is a slap in the face of common sense.

This 9-11 thing is so cheap. About 70 % of the US-Americans seem to belief, they just have to utter "9-11" and it would be perfectly clear, that they had every right in the world, to bomb and invade any country, be it argentina, be it japan, be it mexico, whatsoever.

Americans obviously don't think, there is ever a need to ESTABLISH A LINK.

And Anyway, remember VIETNAM ?

Most European Countries (incl. France and the UK ) at that time stated clear, that to start this war was a simply stupid, stupid, stupid idea.

History repeats itself.

(Well, I hope not for the sake of the Iraqy civilians)

Anyway, how many vietnamese died in the vietnam war ?

[ March 20, 2003, 19:32: Message edited by: Yago ]

 

The point was, and is, we are not just attacking for the sake of attacking somebody. We are not arbitrarily attacking Iraq. There is a long, long, dark line that leads to Iraq. Any nation that is trying to clean up their act will receive our support, those that don't, well lets just say that there are a couple of examples out there for them.

If we just wanted to destroy Iraq, without regards to its people, Basra, and Baghdad would be leveled already, and would be uninhabitable for some time. Same thing if it was all about oil.

And the crack about the IRA is not a good example. The US government is not funding the IRA, and does not endorse such.

 

Hey Darkwolf -- By the way, it was Bill Clinton who helped to make the peace in Ireland. Sorry, I just could not resist that one, since you were so hard on him in the earlier topic. Regardless, I thought America was much better off in that role than the one it has now.

[ March 20, 2003, 19:50: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

The statement about the IRA was no crack or quip. The US governments since the 60's have given their tacit approval to what was going on by NOT making any attempts to stamp out the US based funding despite numerous requests from the UK government.

Sure thing, it was not federal funding, but when the freedoms of your citizens include the ability to openly and publicly raise money to fund terror groups targetting civillians in the UK I think perhaps something ought to have been done a little earlier, don't you?

 

Yago, Yago, Yago... tsk.. how can you overwhelm yourself with such anger while your are not under the falling bombs?

Nice speech Darkwolf, but I still would like to make a few minor comments:

While the are many many forgotten crimes who where against "innocents" (Like the Kurdish Genocide by the Turks and Saddam, and the Armenian Genocide with more than 1.500.000 deaths).

It is still to remember that 11/9 wasn´t meant to kill a lot of innocents, it was meant to hurt your pride and arrogance. If it was solely for the casualties they hit the Sears Towers and another part of the Pentagon (if was publicly known that that part of the Pentagon was under construction and virtually empty) and they attacked at a later time

 

Viking,

Staying within the confines of the US Constitution, how would you have suggested we do that?

Morgoth,

Evidence shows that they barely found the Pentagon, they did not attack a specific section, so that argument won't fly.

And they were not trying to minimize casualties, if they would have been they would have used "red eyes" and attacked at midnight when the buildings would have had a lot less people in them. That argument doesn’t fly either.

[ March 20, 2003, 20:17: Message edited by: Darkwolf ]

 

Well, lets get basic, Darkwolf:

Make a bloody law that prohibits funding terrorism? I'm bloody sure you've got one now, constitution or no.

Or don't tell me, it only prohibits terrorist attrocities against American citizens and property?

[Edit]
@ Morgoth - Please do not use phrases like "It's widely known that it was intended to hurt the American pride etc..." Sorry, this is NOT widely known, because it is pure excuses made by people who have a certain sympathy with the Arab anger at the US / Israeli foreign and in particular the Palestinian situation. Secondly, speculation was in fact that the Pentagon was hit as a secondary target because they failed to find the White House or changed plan at the last minute. Now why go for the bigger target with more people in it (they are close after all) if not to kill as many as possible?

Please do not make excuses for terrorists who target civillians. It is offensive. [Edit]

[ March 20, 2003, 20:22: Message edited by: Viking ]

 

People die. It's life. Many Estonians have died because of stupid wars fought for trade routes. Something like trade routes? Heck, we'd be ELIMINATED if it weren't for those heroes, who encouraged being Estonian, not Russian or German. We suffered, you suffered, the only difference is that US is bigger and the world actually gives a damn about it. But nobody gives a damn 'bout Estonia, except the people who live there.

And Arabwel and I and others have EVERY bloody right to cuss the US incompetent, if we want to. You will not stop us, Darkwolf. Nor any other American, who doesn't like us stupid and moronic not America's arse licking Europeans.

While I don't want war, I want Saddam and his sons dead and the Iraqis liberated.

BTW, before you go lecturing one offender, lecture others too. So we all can laugh.

 

Ermmm

What?? I totally didn´t say "America Genocide" in my last post

 

Morgoth,

Sorry, I was reading too quickly, I have got to stop doing this at work!

Viking,

You are right, we should have done something. But we didn't, so lets just stop doing anything about current problems to pay for our past transgressions!

[ March 20, 2003, 20:25: Message edited by: Darkwolf ]

 

I think Morgoth was referring to the Amrmenian not American Genocide. Nevertheless, I was watching the attack on Iraq on TV, and was struck by the comments from the baldheaded one, Ari, or whatever his name is, that we might be in Iraq longer than we planned -- gee, what a surprise.

 

The attack on the World Trade Center (the Sears Tower is in Chicago) was to kill as many civilians as possible. About 20 thousand people worked in the buildings during the day - this was Al Qaeda's desired death-toll.

The event was designed to scare the United States to hide within its borders, but they did not understand the American Culture. Attacks targetting civilians are the most depraved acts possible. They are the acts of cowards, of evil.

9-11 didn't scare the United States, but it did change our world view. The world went from being chaotic and needing our guidance to violent and evil and, thus, needing our strong intervention.

Al Qaeda accomplished the opposite of their goals.

Saddam is seen as a threat, the type of man who will target civilians and will attack America.

 

Blackhawk,
I respect your opinion about 9/11, but maybe you should turn on your TV and see just how puny Saddam's capibility looks compared to the might that we are unleashing on him -- oh, not just him, but also on many of those who just happen to live in Iraq also. I am reminded of all those children who were told that one of their parents would not be coming home on the evening of 9/11. We should remember those civilians who in Iraq will have the same awful thing happen to them and their families over the next few weeks.

 

@Eze, I don't think that anyone wants Europe to do any "arse licking"; for one thing, that would be rather uncomfortable! But swearing at Bush (or at Chirac, if you're on the other side of the political coin, for that matter) is hardly a logical argument.

As I said earlier, there is plenty of evidence that links Saddam to terrorism. There is little to no evidence that links George W. to the IRA. I think the U.S. has been pretty clear in its condemnation of that particular group. Granted, some Americans (and, regretabbly, some Canadians)have funded Sinn Fein and other fronts for the Irish terrorists, but there has never been govenment support, tacit or otherwise, for the IRA.

To be honest, I've always wondered why the English never took a much more brutal approach to the IRA, though that is definitely a new thread

 

Yes, and if it had been hit, chances are that this forum would be missing a Mathetais.

Kinda sobers you up.

Kinda puts things into perspective.

Kinda makes you realize that terrorists with weapons of mass destruction don't hurt "people" they hurt "us".

 

I'll go you one further, mathetais -- they don't even need WMD -- all they need is boxcutters.

"Every Man's death diminishes me, for I am involved with mankind" John Donne.

I know this could be used as an anti-war slogan as well, but I take the lives lost on 9/11, the lives lost to suicide bombers, the lives lost to snipers, the lives lost to poison gas, the lives lost to regular bombers (a la the IRA) very personally -- trying to stop those sorts of deaths is a worthwile action. I know that it seems paradoxal that we have to kill to do it, but it is a fact nonetheless, and I've never criticized anyone for acting in self defense.