No Womd

  • Thread starter Thread starter keeno_uk
  • 44 comments
  • 1,100 views
keeno_uk

keeno_uk

Messages
1,157
United Kingdom
London
Okay so the war is on and any amount of arguing isn,t gonna make it end so answer me this question. When we get rid of Saddam Hussain which is only a matter of time now and we start digging up for WOMD. If we don't find anything how are we (USA and UK) gonna look good and how are our politicians gonna excuse themselfs from a truly needless war?
 
I think your question is a good one, and one that will never be settled. People who were already convinced there were no WOMD will simply claim they were planted if found. This is very predictable, and Saddam's regime will claim it as well. Those who were already convinced he has them will feel satisfied. But everybody will say "See? Told you so," on both sides.

The more important question is: What if he uses them? Nobody seems to want to discuss that.

I read yesterday that Bush sent Saddam a letter before the first Gulf War telling him that if he used WOMD he Iraq would suffer the "severest consequences." That doesn't mean nothing. But what?

And thanks Keeno, for starting one of the very few potentially intelligent discussions about the war.
 
Even without WOMD, this war isn't "needless". Brutal dictators need to go. He's earned this war by the treatment of his own people and the ethnic minorities in Iraq, let alone by posturing and hiding and preparing illegal weapons.

FWIW I fully believe that he has them. Whether or not he can get to them or not at this point (and if he'd use them if he can) I don't know.

If he thinks it will be to his advantage, he will use them. He's probably canny enough to realize that it is not likely to be to his advantage. In fact if he is not killed it is to his advantage to make it look like this was a wild goose chase. But still and all I believe that if he sees that he can cause enough damage, he will use them.

And what happens if he does? Collateral damage goes up as we pound the living crap out of Iraq and stop being so careful about it. But Bush won't go nuclear - I'd stake my life on that.
 
Sometimes it worries me that if we can't find them we will be in big trouble with the rest of the world. But if he really did destroy them then why didn't he just show proof of that? It would have been really easy for him to avoid this whole thing. Plus I agree with Duke that even if he doesn't have them he needs to go because of his barbaric treatment of his people.
 
The big danger as this drags out is the Arab world turning on the US - it's almost getting to the point that the US needs a chemical or biological attacks on its troops for its long term image post war - which is an awful thing to say...
 
To mr.DGB454 every country has had a severe bad time with at least one leader right now cause my head hurts I can't remember a few except south africa's APARTHEID. Now we know that everyone around the world was against that but did anyone do anything about that? Hell No and that went on for 30 yrs and saddam probably had a reason to gas his people maybe because they wanted to get him out of power. what would Bush do if his own people was gonna use violence to get him out of power I'm sure the military would be involved.

Also I reckon if they don't find any WOMD then both our governments would say " we didn't find any weapons however we did find the tools the materials and the relevent engineers and technicians to build them" what a load of ****
 
I seriously doubt we would use poison gas to kill milloins of our own people because the president was threatened. We use tools like impeachment. It's called democracy.
 
Saddam is a shrewd SOB. He has control of AL-Jazera (sp) the news network and is spinning the war to make it look like he is the one being picked upon.
He has also bought in the past American camoflage uniforms, and has his men wearing them and attacking civilians.
He is broadcasting this crap on his commandeered network. This is getting him the support of the people, and making us look bad.
I fear that this will get worse in the sense that the level of illiteracy is very high in Iraq, and the people will believe the crap that they are "fed" and will become more resistant.
 
Originally posted by DGB454
I seriously doubt we would use poison gas to kill milloins of our own people because the president was threatened. We use tools like impeachment. It's called democracy.
Click to expand...

No - you miss my point. What I was getting at was that the attack on Iraq has angered Arab nations severely, and that the war is getting to the point that the Iraqi command would need to do something particularly evil for Middle Eastern opinion to turn to the coalition.

This is war is about post-Saddam Iraq, remember, not about what happens to GBW in 2004 (and I think he's stuffed).
 
Originally posted by Gil
Saddam is a shrewd SOB. He has control of AL-Jazera (sp) the news network and is spinning the war to make it look like he is the one being picked upon.
He has also bought in the past American camoflage uniforms, and has his men wearing them and attacking civilians.
He is broadcasting this crap on his commandeered network. This is getting him the support of the people, and making us look bad.
I fear that this will get worse in the sense that the level of illiteracy is very high in Iraq, and the people will believe the crap that they are "fed" and will become more resistant.
Click to expand...
Whoa, that's some stuff I havn't heard yet... How old are these uniforms Saddam has? What's crazy is that even if he got some German WW2 camoflaged uniforms, the people could mistake them for Americans or Outsiders. This thing will eventually be fought with both the weapons and the media....
 
Originally posted by vat_man
No - you miss my point. What I was getting at was that the attack on Iraq has angered Arab nations severely, and that the war is getting to the point that the Iraqi command would need to do something particularly evil for Middle Eastern opinion to turn to the coalition.

This is war is about post-Saddam Iraq, remember, not about what happens to GBW in 2004 (and I think he's stuffed).
Click to expand...

My comment wasn't directed at you vat_man it was directed at keeno. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
 
Originally posted by M5Power
Dunno - a case could be made that any ruler of a country is brutal, President Bush included.
Click to expand...
That is relative to the point of absurdity. Yes. Bush is brutal compared to Snuggle the Laundry Bear. And Saddam is brutal compared to Bush.
 
hmm still knowone has answered my question. Maybe because any excuse whould probably be to shabby to allow this war to have taken place
 
Originally posted by keeno_uk
If we don't find anything how are we (USA and UK) gonna look good and how are our politicians gonna excuse themselfs from a truly needless war?
Click to expand...
hmm still knowone has answered my question. Maybe because any excuse whould probably be to shabby to allow this war to have taken place
Click to expand...

Well it's just a pretty simple question. The UK and U.S.A. would look bad.

But it's really not quite so simple, as I said above:
I think your question is a good one, and one that will never be settled. People who were already convinced there were no WOMD will simply claim they were planted if found. This is very predictable, and Saddam's regime will claim it as well. Those who were already convinced he has them will feel satisfied. But everybody will say "See? Told you so," on both sides.
Click to expand...
 
Sometimes the answer is so simple its unbeleivable.
Leaders not afraid to lead,, to take a risk to defend the people who they represent. And the people they are leading support them because they think they are right on both moral and political grounds..We all can/'t be spineless cowardly bastards..we have the French for that.
 
Originally posted by milefile
That is relative to the point of absurdity. Yes. Bush is brutal compared to Snuggle the Laundry Bear. And Saddam is brutal compared to Bush.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Like the term 'need.'

Sure, no-one needs an SUV - but do we even need to live at all?
 
Originally posted by milefile
The more important question is: What if he uses them? Nobody seems to want to discuss that.
Click to expand...

Well so far he hasn't used any chemical and biological weapons yet I reckon by now he would have used them since the USARMY is storming through Baghdad as we speak shooting anything that moves. That is a horrific sight :( !
 
Well, you're welcome to that interpretation... "anything that moves". If we were actually doing that, we would have just flattened the place in the first 24 hours of the war and gone home without a single casualty on our side. The reason we've lost soldiers to car bombs and other guerilla/terrorist violence is that we're not just shooting anything that moves.
:rolleyes:
Yes there have been civillian casualties. That happens in a war, no matter how much anybody tries to stop it. Funny thing - if Saddam was so freaking worried about his own civilians, wouldn't he have been careful to make sure that all of his military emplacements were away from the population? But instead, he's deliberately put his military facilities right next to mosques and hospitals and probably orphanages.

Yet it's the Americans who are evil? You are so... oh, skip it. It's not worth the effort.
 
Duke is right. Not to mention the anti aircraft guns he has placed in civilian yards and forcing the people living there to remain in their homes or be shot instead of letting them go to a safer place.
 
okay what I saw last saturday morning was LIVE footage on sky one where american tanks were just riding on the motorway and believe me any vehicle that moved got shot Live on television. Now you can say what you want to say about any justifications but I saw what I saw maybe they were civilian maybe they were suicide bombers who knows really ? :confused:
 
The Iraqi's are using civilian vehicles mounted with machine guns and Irregular forces dressed in civilian clothes, cars are warned off once. If they keep coming they are dealt with. Thats the price you pay for suicide bombings and the Iraqis know it. The regime now has us helping them keep the population from moving. They wan't civilian deaths to show the world, and do not care how they get them. Desperate as they are.
Also the reports are that they are now finding the WOMD, missles armed and ready with chems and booby-trapped barrells full of chemicals ready to have been distributed to front line units, that have been already over run, seems we just moved too fast to get them used on us. If you want a link to the articles let me know. But you can probably see it all live on CNN ..they are using feeds from Arab tv.
 
Originally posted by keeno_uk
okay what I saw last saturday morning was LIVE footage on sky one where american tanks were just riding on the motorway and believe me any vehicle that moved got shot Live on television. Now you can say what you want to say about any justifications but I saw what I saw maybe they were civilian maybe they were suicide bombers who knows really ? :confused:
Click to expand...

Today i've watched a fair bit of footage of this on BBC and ITV. They only shot at stuff that has been percived as a threat (hopefully) if you are stupid enough during wartime to drive towards a fully armed tank, you deserve to be shot.

Oh well at least the British troops in Basra (is it basra?) were well recived. Although they keep showing all these palaces that they have captured. Wow big deal you captured a palace, good for you :rolleyes: .
 
Stuff from the Palaces..Don't think there's much of a market for little chunks of crap.
 

Latest Posts

Back