So let me get this straight. 15 insepctors

[Bazoukas]

To look over Iraq. for weapons  Riiiiiight!!
15 people. Kinda short of a number dont you think?

[choasforages]

its called bush 2.0 is out for war.

too bad hes making a terrible statigic error, we are fighting a war in afgahnistan, but we are starting one in iraq. didn't we learn anything from hitler, or his defeat, the fact that two front wars don't work.

[avello500]

i cant think of anyone who ever accused little bush of being big on smarts.  :eek:

[voidmain]

Well Bush doesn't really have any control over the inspections or how they are done. Currently there are 17 inspectors, there should be around 100 there before the end of this month and they want to have around 300 by January:

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/18851/story.htm

Personally, I think they should send in about 500,000 "inspectors".

[choasforages]

yeah, i hate saddam ALOT , i also don't like the chinese government, hell, i don't like most countrys government. but saddam has to go, but we should be careful. sure we could kick saddams ass, but what about the rest of those sucidal motherfuckers. you take one on, the rest will probably follow. besides the first thing i thought after 9/11, is to take a cruise missile, and blow up that shitty holy rock in mecca. call it an attack on their "symbols", becuase, well they said that the world trade center's were a symbol of the U.S.'s power. but that would piss too many U.S. muslims off, as well as destroy a "world" history item, damned complications of a good idea

[voidmain]

Well, I'm a little more reserved than that. I believe the radicals are few in the grand scheme of things. They do seem to have a very big voice though. I am still undecided on what Iraq has in regards to Nuclear capability. I personally would like to see the inspectors find something, and that they somehow find a link between Saddam and the radicals. I think that is a lot to ask though as Saddam is very good at shuffling/hiding things. I would also prefer to see Iraq overthrow Sadam on their own and implement real elections and become good world citizens. I hope that happens but I think it is a long shot that it will happen on its own.

As a side note, I spent 7 months in the desert near the Iraq/Kuwait border throughout all of Desert Shield and Desert Storm so I do have somewhat of a personal interest in this.

[Annorax]

There's an easier way to deal with the Saddam problem... atomic weapons? If Baghdad is full of nukes now, point the thing at it and start the new Bush ad campaign, "Baghdad Today, Green Glowing Hole Tomorrow"!!!

End of Saddam problem, and certainly those suicidal motherfuckers will think twice after they see everything they care about reduced to constituent atoms...  

[Doctor V]

Saddam is evil and should be watched.  Weapons inspectors are necessary.  But going to war and Ousting Saddam Husein is not a good idea.  Bush is hungry for war.  He will go to war with Iraq with the drop of a hat.  He's just looking for an excuse.  Although the intervention of the American military was able to topple the taliban, it has yet to find either Osama or the former taliban leader.  The same would likely be the case with Iraq.  With the various ethnic groups in Iraq, toppeling Saddam would only throw the nation into chaos.  At least the people have stability now.  A war would cause more problems than it would fix.

America should push a normal relationship with both the nation of Cuba, and the nation of Iran.  Korea is far more dangerous than Iraq, its just that Korea dosn't get the same media attention.  Koreans are zealously nationalistic, they're nationalistic fanaticism would scare even the most radical of Islamic clerics.

[Bazoukas]

I dont get it.  On one hand they want to be liberated and on the other hand they dont take up arms.
    Greece was for 400 years under the Turks and after the American Revolution the Greeks took arms (with the financial help of Britain) and kicked the shit out of them with out using anybodys Army to do the dirty work.

[pkd_lives]

It's called the power (cult) of personality. It's a very dangerous thing. It was one of the tools Hitler had at his disposal. The biggest practitioner was Stalin. Even today there are people in Russia - and the surrounding territories - that believe Stalin was great, despite the fact that evidence has been shown to these people of the attrocities Stalin commited - they simply cannot bring themselves to believe it. And when death is the alternative to believing it's amazing how conditioned a person can become to a certain idea, no matter how wrong it may be.

Saddam Hussein has the same thing. However unlike in Stalins day the people can gain access to the internet, and slowly ideas are filtering in that the government have no control over. And this will be the biggest factor for worldwide democracy.

When you can control information and put forward the image of a leader to your own people - you can have amazing powers of control.

[clagh131]

I don't think "Bush" himself has much of a say in anything,..other then to read the pre-written speech given to him.  Which I have to say he has gotten quite good at (public speaking).
I would also be suprised to hear that any amount of inspectors sent to Iraq discover anything that's of "shocking news." (Although anything "found" will presented over the news in true SHOCK value form). We will be going to war regardless,.. WHTVR "evidence" the Bush admins decided to use to justify this has long since been determined, and will told to us soon in a speech written for BUSH to relay.  BUt I certainly don't believe that the Bush ADMINS are just waiting around to see what is actually FOUND in IRAQ.  They know what's there,..and will let us know just whtvr they believe we can handle knowing is there.

[Annorax]

Just another example of authority telling us what to think, when to think it, and how hard to suck their dicks when they tell us.

Somehow a trip straight to Hell would do them some good!

[Pissed_Macman]

oops accidentally posted twice. Oh well

[ December 03, 2002: Message edited by: Macman: Mac Commando / b0b ]

[Pissed_Macman]

quote:Originally posted by choasforages:
its called bush 2.0 is out for war.

too bad hes making a terrible statigic error, we are fighting a war in afgahnistan, but we are starting one in iraq. didn't we learn anything from hitler, or his defeat, the fact that two front wars don't work.

Except Germany was a pathetic little country that was going bankrupt back then. The US could fight on ten fronts and win (which isn't necessarily a pleasant thought). In fact we did in WWII and it only took two big-ass nukes.

 

quote:Originally posted by The Rev. Annorax:
Somehow a trip straight to Hell would do them some good!

And you should know, right? How is it down there this time of year, anyway?

[DC]

quote:Originally posted by The Rev. Annorax:
There's an easier way to deal with the Saddam problem... atomic weapons? If Baghdad is full of nukes now, point the thing at it and start the new Bush ad campaign, "Baghdad Today, Green Glowing Hole Tomorrow"!!!

End of Saddam problem, and certainly those suicidal motherfuckers will think twice after they see everything they care about reduced to constituent atoms...    

Atom bombs do NOT explode when you hit them with something. Well, they might, but not in a nuclear blast. That's because you have to specifically shoot two (or more, which is even more impossible) 2-20 Kg metal parts at each other, pretty damn well aligned and have to keep them together for some milliseconds (and the thing wants to BLOW UP HARD if you get 'm together, so that *is* hard). An accidental explosion nearby won't do that.