Should The U.S. Invade Iraq Now?

[PsychoSy]

This has sparked my interest/distain and I wonder what the general consensus is among you folks.

[volt]

Attacking Iraq just because of the economic fall would be very foolish.

[DaveW]

I think it would be best to do neither, and kill saddam in a covert op. Saddam has to go, but I think the Iraqis have suffered enough.

[vampireuk]

I say no, is there any proof that he is going to be a huge threat apart from someone whispering in bush's ear?

Edit: I'd agree with DaveW's point a covert op to eliminate him. A full scale invasion would just create unnessecary casualties on both sides and the civilians would suffer

[Pakman]

Ask the oil companies. They make those kind of decisions nowadays. There is always a lot of money to be made off wars. All that we add to the national debt is paid back three times over due to interest charges to bankers. Don't think that we owe that money to the US government.

Shoot a couple hundred missiles off at a million dollars a pop, multiply the cost by three, and you see why war is such a good business. Add to it the oil which your companies plunder and charge us through the nose for, and it's a "gotta do" proposition. Don't gauge world events by corporate news hype. Take a look at who profits by war and how they are connected. It makes it a lot easier than trying to guess things by perceptions gained while watching the corporate news that's spooned to us like so much pabulum.

[r2d2d3d4d5]

Theres a lot of dictators out there, just as evil as Saddam, but no one seems to care. If you are going to go after Saddam you should go after them all. China is probably a bigger threat to America and how about all the Arabian princes that bankrolled Alqaida. I haven't seen any of them in Camp X-Ray. Bush got all the underlings in Afghanistan and is now going after someone he knows he can beat in Saddam.

Bush is just looking for a distraction from his dogie election victory and is looking to build up his popularity so that he can win a second term.

[vampireuk]

No one in their right mind would go after China.....actually this is bush;) :D

Would another reason for bush giving immunity to his soldiers be because those at camp X-Ray are been tortured for information?

Bush is just looking for a distraction from his dogie election victory and is looking to build up his popularity so that he can win a second term

Thats a very dangerous way to go about it, a normal persons way would be to rebuild the economy instead of (to quote psychosy) wipe their ass with international law and chase after other countries. I think he should stop trying to be the worlds police and take a look at his own country, just like Tony Blair should do:mad:

[-=DVS=-]

Ahh i am tired of all this war can't we all be friends :D

People of Planet earth must unite or Aliens will come and slave us all :eek:

[5150 Joker]

Originally posted by DVS
Ahh i am tired of all this war can't we all be friends :D

People of Planet earth must unite or Aliens will come and slave us all :eek:

Too late, aliens are here. One's sitting next to me right now having some nachos.

[-=DVS=-]

Originally posted by 5150 Joker


Too late, aliens are here. One's sitting next to me right now having some nachos.


AAAA... Run For your Life MAN !! :eek:

[5150 Joker]

I personally feel that Saddam is a limited threat to the U.S. and it's interests overseas, but he does oppress his people with force as do all dictators. If that's cause enough to remove him from power, then all dictators like him should also be ousted in my view. If we're going to do a job, we should do it correctly. I agree with other's assessments that this war on the "axis of evil" is just a way for Bush to drum up domestic support and deflect any opposition against him by labeling them unpatriotic in a time of war. He'll continue this crusade of his until the next elections. I believe the same holds true for his counterpart Blair in the UK. Also one must consider the consequences of removing Saddam from power--who will replace him and will they be able to hold the country together? In a lot of people's views, Iraq is ready to collapse at any time since it has a large Shi'ite population who are sympathetic to Iran and they'd welcome any incursions by Iran into Iraqi territory. Also, without a forced hand, the Kurds would begin rebelling and asking for their own nation which would create problems for Turkey since they also have a Kurd problem. Would the U.S. bother dealing with all of these issues or just brush them aside? Also, in order to prevent a successive regime akin to Saddams, an occupying army would be needed to oversee rebuilding of Iraq's government and the U.S. has already shown it doesn't have that kind of dedication as witnessed in Afghanistan.

[DaveW]

Ahh i am tired of all this war can't we all be friends

Anyone who is friends with Saddam has something wrong with him.

When Saddam first ceased power, he gave a speech to all the politians in a big hall. I remember watching a video of it. Saddam, who never stopped smiling, then read out a list of names of all the people who ever spoke against him. Those people with their names called stood up and were escorted by guards from the room and never seen again.

One of the wifes of the missing men visited Saddam, got down on her knees and begged for the return of her husband. Saddam smiled at her and promised that he would return her husband to her. The next morning the woman woke to find a bag on her doorstep containing the body parts of her husband.

Saddam also used chemical weapons on ethnic minorities in his own country. Don't you remember watching it on TV? The bodies of dead women huddled over their dead children? Can you imagine what that would have been like? You are dying, your own child is dying, he or she is crying and in pain, as are you, and all you can do is hold them and wait to die, the gas burning your eyes so badly that you can't even see them.... It brings me to tears just to think about it.

Saddam ordered those attacks and was reportedly pleased with the effectiveness of his new chemical weapons. Sorry, but we can't all be friends with people like that. He needs killing.

[-=DVS=-]

Originally posted by 5150 Joker
I personally feel that Saddam is a limited threat to the U.S. and it's interests overseas, but he does oppress his people with force as do all dictators. If that's cause enough to remove him from power, then all dictators like him should also be ousted in my view. If we're going to do a job, we should do it correctly. I agree with other's assessments that this war on the "axis of evil" is just a way for Bush to drum up domestic support and deflect any opposition against him by labeling them unpatriotic in a time of war. He'll continue this crusade of his until the next elections. I believe the same holds true for his counterpart Blair in the UK. Also one must consider the consequences of removing Saddam from power--who will replace him and will they be able to hold the country together? In a lot of people's views, Iraq is ready to collapse at any time since it has a large Shi'ite population who are sympathetic to Iran and they'd welcome any incursions by Iran into Iraqi territory. Also, without a forced hand, the Kurds would begin rebelling and asking for their own nation which would create problems for Turkey since they also have a Kurd problem. Would the U.S. bother dealing with all of these issues or just brush them aside? Also, in order to prevent a successive regime akin to Saddams, an occupying army would be needed to oversee rebuilding of Iraq's government and the U.S. has already shown it doesn't have that kind of dedication as witnessed in Afghanistan.

Saddam's army is like a cult everyone will follow him what can we do :rolleyes: its hopless dooo them all with big BANG :p

[5150 Joker]

Originally posted by DVS


Saddam's army is like a cult everyone will follow him what can we do :rolleyes: its hopless dooo them all with big BANG :p

Actually his army will likely murder him if given the chance. They're ruled by suspicion and uncertainty and that's the only reason they fall in line. His only dedicated troops are the Republican Guard and even a lot of them would probably waver during a serious battle. Getting saddam out of power isn't a difficult task for the U.S., however deciding on a successive government and holding it together is much trickier.

[PsychoSy]

Since I started this poll, I chose not to vote. However, I will say that going after Iraq now is a great "business" propostion for the Bush regime. They need the wars to continue because that's their ticket to a successful re-election as well as more money in the pockets. Afterall, the original Persian Gulf War made Dick Cheney an even richer man through his own Halliburton shell game.

In that aspect, it's a great business proposition. But that's all it is.

The U.S., in its entire history, has never lauched a pre-emptive strike on anyone and there's no reason to start now. Historically, we've usally let our enemies make the first move and then we'd promptly respond. Personally, I believe that we should give Saddam Hussein enough rope to hang himself with and then proceed to take him out.

No question about it - he's got to go. But how it's done and the time frame it is done in is crucial. DaveW's covert operation idea is a lot better than just waltzing in there with troops.

The Bush regime using the events of 9/11 as well as using McCarthy-esque "we could get attacked again" gospel on a daily basis as an excuse to war with other sovereign nations is pathetic, that it shows just how ignorant the Bush regime is on dealing with arabian Terrorists (which have a history of attacking suddenly, then running away like chickens only to lay low until nobody expects them to attack again) and it'll get us into more trouble from our allies than we really need.

The events of 9/11 was nothing more than a textbook, purely isolated, terrorist attack. All it did was wake us up and make us more alert. Chickensh*t terrorists historically don't attack a nation that is alert and purposefully lookout for more attacks - they'd would rather wait until a "peaceful" time period, where their attacks would carry more psychological weight behind them because of their unexpected and sudden nature.

Mark my words, there won't be another large scale terrorist attack on our soil again for a long time, despite what Rumsfeld says. These terrorists are fleeing for their lives only stopping long enough to issue idle threats and mini-scares just to keep us paranoid and to piss us off, hoping that our anger will throw off our gameplan, causing us to make a mistake.

I've been in quite a number of fist fights and, of those that I've lost, it's because my anger made me make a mistake, and the calmer person capitalized on it to kick my royal ass as high as a kite. As the old adage says, cooler heads prevail.

[McBane]

Bah!

Get this crap over with and kill the Son Of A Camel.....

Kill Hussein, get some US puppet idiot in charge, lower gas prices, presto-blammo....

[-=DVS=-]

I would like electromobile's to replace gasmobiles we need to save our nature :eek:

[bigC]

Gulf War 1 was a great TV show. i think that Gulf War 2: the USA Strikes Back, will be even better, since the USA has developed better technology since the last war, so the SFX will be amazing, and the cast of characters has changed, and are even more colourful and interesting than the first episode. i can't wait to start watching CNN daily--it's better than going to the movies! :)

re Saddam--he's not entirely stupid. he knows that if he does anything that provokes the USA that the wrath of God will descend upon him very quickly. so, he will continue to oppress his people, hoping that the USA does not turn it's eyes towards him anytime soon, since he cannot win. and, if there is another Gulf War, Bush will not stop until the job is done.

[Kruno]

I'm sure Saddam has got a chemical surprise waiting for the Army that comes by. There was this interview with this guy defected general of Suddam's and he said that Suddam has developed weapons (chemical, bio etc...) that can kill someone even with protection like gas masks. The general said he had seen it happen. Basically 3 guys lined up. 1 with a gas mask, the other with out one and the other guy with a suit. When the gas was released all 3 died around the same time.

[Atrus]

Why limit the scope to foreign nations? Let's go after the RIAA! :mad: :D

[Feanor]

Originally posted by vampireuk
Thats a very dangerous way to go about it, a normal persons way would be to rebuild the economy instead of (to quote psychosy) wipe their ass with international law and chase after other countries. I think he should stop trying to be the worlds police and take a look at his own country, just like Tony Blair should do:mad:

Well next question...do you believe that George Bush is a normal person? :D

[Darth Rancid]

Well...

If getting rid of Saddam is that important to the USA, why didn't it do it last time?

Colapsing Iraq doesn't need to be a bad thing though... Don't the Kurds deserve a country of their own....? Just after the last Gulf War, when the US forbade Iraq to fly combat aircraft over their own territory, Turkey took a very uncivilized shot at the Kurds in Iraq... they sent their air force into Iraq and bombed Kurd villages, because they said they were harbouring "Kurd terrorists" who had been doing bad things in Turkey...
Well Turkey, when you opress a people they WILL begin to do bad things.. its all in the history books, and all over the world today.

I think a Kurd nation is long overdue.

[[Corporal Dan]]

Originally posted by Feanor


Well next question...do you believe that George Bush is a normal person? :D

NO

ok?

[vampireuk]

If a premptive strike was launced what tactics do you think would be employed?

[volt]

seek and destroy