you dont know me. these forums show no personality. if you knew me you would know that composing music makes me the happiest, as well as playing classical guitar, like bach. i am a romantic. I enjoy dinner dates at italian restarounts and love going to the symphony. I totally agree with the above statement. so what is your problem with me and my views.
except, they wont eliminate him, his soldiers will be eliminated, i can almost promise you america and britain wont find him.....if there was the slightest chance he would be killed or captured, then america would have all the support it would ever need, but honestly, they couldnt kill osama...how the fook are they going to get saddam!?hell be back....
Bush, stated to the Iraqi soldiers they have a chance to evade the war by cooperating with US soldiers. you are wrong about saddam coming back. if he leaves he will never be able to return without serious consequence.
Never found him in desert storm methinks & he came backPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
this time we will not leave until he is captured or dead and the Iraqi people are capable of running their own country.
sure.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! pitty we cant do the same for america really isnt it!?
we do run our country. in a democracy we elect officials called senators and a person called a president. these people represent the majority of the population. So in fact the majority of the population is running the country.
Are you really that naieve? Just a few weeks ago Bush was interviewed and the interviewer mentioned that according to the latest poll the majority of Americans (something like 68%) were against the war. His reply was that the American people voted him in to make these decisions for them and if 100% of Americans were aginst the war it wouldn't make a difference to him. He was there to make these difficult decisions for us.
Besides, it is not a Pure Democracy it is a Representative Democracy. We do not run the government. The majority vote of the government OFTEN does not reflect the majority opinion of the people.
then what do you propose as a solution? that information is old here is a link to a moe recent poll. infact the majority of the USA agrees with an Attack even without UN support. http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
What is the US defending itself against? This is all pre-emptive... there has been no attack on america by Iraq. They couldn't find osama and then just plain gave up... now its time to make an example of someone that could easily be turned into the next hitler figure, and hey... wow, this is the convenient part... OIL!!! "Oh man, did you just say that america will profit immensly from this war? That works out on so many levels!" "Yes it does little Timmy... yes it does... "] And whats up with "operation liberty shield"... more like "economy boost"
] Mate this is known as OCCUPATION. So not only do you want to "invade" Iraq you want to sit there & occupy it for an indefnite amount of time while you look for Saddam or look-alikes. When will they be "ready to run their own country"? When Bush decides? Sounds too scary to me that your leader will make all these lofty decisions against the will of the people in the polls becasuse he wants to "make the hard decisions for you" -what if people REALLY dont want war & not just saying it & secretly wishing it to have a clean image.
Oh, that felt good. I just laughed again. If this war gets you down, and you thouht like I did you're above a chuckle over our unnecessary mass murder, give Halcyon Days a try. Warning: The levity is fleeting. I hate having to get used to that.
you are a DyCK. you are against the liberation of the iraqi people. that makes you a NAZI. these people want freedom and you want to stop it. I know what occupation is. it is like when your finger is occupying your A$$.
yeah, a nazi, hitler was always talking about not wanting the Iraqis to be attacked Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! see argument #3 here: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19533
Hey BACH, ignore the useful idiots of Saddam here... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! They'd sooner cheer for the killing of their own soldiers than for the killin of Saddam's soldiers.
Interesting to go back four years and see what sciforums was saying about the war. For those of you that posted in this thread four years ago, this week, do you still see things the way you did before the shooting started? Have any of you found your thoughts and feelings toward the war migrating in one direction or another as the last four years have played out? Since I didn't post in this thread back then, I'll share: I was opposed to the war based on several beliefs. I didn't believe that Saddam was the most pre-eminent threat to the West, as he was mostly a secular leader, and knew the full capabilities of the U.S. It shocked me that he didn't do more to avert the war, as I knew he was a dead man if he didn't, and I figured he probably did too. Once the shooting started I resolved myself to support the action, because I trusted what I was hearing from people like Colin Powell. I wouldn't have believed he could have been so easily duped. Now I'm sitting here seeing how it all unfolded, and I guess I come back to my monniker. 15 of the 19 were from Saudi Arabia. Why didn't we attack them?
I was for the war at the time. I believed Saddam was building WMD and should be stopped. I knew Bush would do a crappy job of it though. Guess what, Bush lied about the WMD and did do a crappy job of the war.
