Are We All Dead?

I apologize, you are correct, without sarcasium i apologize.

When Saddam Hussein accepted the terms of the 1991 Gulf War cease-fire, he agreed to destroy or render all Iraqs weapons of mass destruction....... .......The United Nations weapon inspectors left in 1998 after obstruction after obstruction rendering their work as pointless...............
The question remains.........."What is he hiding".......................The International Atomic Energy Agency dismantled 40 nuclear "research facilities" before the UN left Iraq. For me.........this clearly shows Saddams intentions.

__________________
~ Nikki ~

"I'm your hell, I'm your dream.......I'm nothing in between.......You know you wouldn't want it any other way".........

"Listen, when I slap you, you'll take it and like it"..........Humphrey Bogart..........Maltese Falcon.......

Graze on my lips and if those hills be dry, stray lower, where the pleasant fountains lie...........William Shakespeare.......

Just chiming in for a moment here...
Saddam did this way back when he was a US backed dictator fighting the evil Iranians.
By the same token, is anyone concerned with who originally gave him the weapons, or who taught his people how to make them? Both of the answers begin with U and end with A, with only one part of the acronym in between. The war ended, Saddam stopped folowing orders, and we decided it was time he died (anyone having some Stalin/Trotsky flashbacks?).
I think if Hussein still did have weapons, or if he intended to use them on the U.S. of A he would have done so. Because let's face it, as long as we keep a decent eye on him -which we have been doing for a long while- , I much doubt that he will be able to contribute to any standing arsenal.

If we should have any concerns right now, I think they should lie with North Korea, who have certainly violated more human rights laws of late, threatened more countries, and expressed more anti-American sentiments than Iraq. Additonally, they've openly admitted to building nuclear weapons, and turned away U.N. inspectors, and diplomats, and more importantly rejected U.N. orders to stop their behavior.

__________________
"We are all worms, but I do believe I am a glow-worm."
--Winston Churchill

What i want to know is does America have nuclear capabilities and weapons of mass destruction? and if so why is it one rule for one country and another for another country!

I just feel like war would have been avoidable had the American's just stopped stirring trouble, certainly enquire but not always be so pushy! Now IF Saddam has weapons that have not been found, War or no war i wouldnt be surprised if he uses them because he has every right to be pi$$ed off!

Naisy, you know I like you...but if you were here right now, I'd slap you for your ignorance.

__________________
"Today, war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."

Well instead of claiming im ignorant explain so that i no longer am, that might help me, but when you offer nothing than i can only stick with my opinions.

We "backed" him mildly and temporarily to rid ourselves of a greater enemy. I don't see what's so damning about this.


First off, we didn't give him "the weapons." We gave him some. Though you might be hard pressed to present a source for such data. Assuming you can, however, what's your point? I don't care how we got in the situation, so much as how we're to get out of it. As far as I can make out, you're just trying to remind us that America is imperfect, as the procurement of the weapons means nothing when the issue is how to deal with the fact that they've been procured.


If he doesn't have the weapons, why is he hassling inspectors? Doing so is clearly hazardous to his health, if you know what I mean. Regardless, there is always the potential threat of Saddam supplying others who ARE capable of coming at us, even if he himself cannot. All the same, the weapons shouldn't be in his hands, and the evidence tells us that they are, in direct violation of the UN's order and the US' very reasonable ultimatum. End of story.


I'm going to defer to the experts in the US government, who probably know what they're doing, strategy-wise. For one, its been said that the situation with North Korea is remarkably similar to that of the Soviets not long ago, which was eventually resolved peacefully by focusing, in negotiations, on their human rights record. Perhaps the idea is to deal with Saddam and then dispatch the same gameplan in regards to North Korea.

Naisy, it was your, "he has every right to be pissed off" statement. That, to me and maybe me alone, is an ignorant statement. Ignorant doesn't mean stupid, it means unknowledgable. I wasn't trying to hurt your feelings, but Saddam doesn't have any right to be pissed. He started a war and lost it, then was to conform to a certain set of guidlines in order for him to stay in power. You see, the world allowed him to stay as long as he met the conditions from his loss of the war. Not only has he not met those stipulations, he has spat at the enforcing community, and the enforcing community allowed it! Now, time has come to own up to the spit that he's hurled at us, and he has the right to be pissed???

That's what I meant. Don't worry, you can still bear my child and I'll call you winkie.

Well now we are all screwed! Bushy and Howard are going to go to war dispite what the people want and a war is a stupid thing no matter what way you think about it!

A war is a sad thing no matter how you think about it...but not always a stupid thing.

A war should be about soldiers vs soldiers. Not planes bombing the whole country, innocents and all. That's not a war, that's a slaughter.

__________________
"I know a man who was born with his heart on the outside. Every man's worst fear, he also had heavy hands. he couldn't touch his lovers face, he couldn't hold a baby." - Buck 65

oh yeah i see that happening anytime soon soon

Chris, how could this war in anyway be a good thing? or a wise thing? Im sorry but this is just BS

It depends on what you're fighting for. Was William Wallace stupid and foolish for rebelling against his oppressors? Was the American Revolution not a good thing? Some wars are necessary.


Why "should" a war include infantry alone? What about guns? If guns, why not cannons? If cannons, why not tanks? If tanks, why not planes? If planes, why not planes with bombs? What is this "should" based on?

It should be said that those who enjoy the benefits of a goverment are not innocent bystanders of it's actions. "We the People" are responsible for the actions of our government. If the world has a problem with the government of the United States of America, then they have a problem with me as well. I am not extricated from the collection of my people. The soldiers of America are my brothers and sisters and I will fight in any way I can for them... I do not distance myself from them while enjoying the fruit of their labors. It is because of them that we are a free nation.

What of planes bombing buildings? Terrorist acts against the populous of the free? If it is innocent blood spilled on American soil it's ok?

You paint only half the picture.