FROSTY28 Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 Reading this thead is like watching Drago bash Apollo in the beginning of Rocky 3 -- somebody throw in the towel before Kurp inflicts more damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 Ahhh, the intellectual giant rears his pimply head again. The proof will be in the pudding guys. Personally, I think this argument is largely about semantics. While some of the 'the case has not been made' arguments are eloquent and logically stated (hail Kurp), the truth is that it is highly probable that Hussein has large stores of VX, Sarin, and mustard agents. We know he had them. We're confident he didn't speak to Jesus and destroy them. We just have to find them. What puzzles me is the general undertone of this conversation in which I almost perceive a desire to ridicule as 'mindlessly follwoing the Bush administration line' those that believe as I do, that Hussein is a bloodthirsty thug who has got bad bad weapons and lies about nearly every criminal action he's ever taken. If there is naivete here, I have to believe it exists in the minds of those that see a murdering tyrant in front of them, even acknowledge him as such, but argue we must have proof that will stand up in US courts in order to confront him. They are going to find some terrible things, and that will end this particular conversation. But we have a lot of Republican Guard to send on their way first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 Well said, Tarhog. People need to remember that our guys in Iraq are focused for the moment on little matters like shooting hundreds of Iraqis who continue to shoot at them with AK-47's, mortars and RPG's, etc. When it comes time to scour the country for weapons, we'll find them. Frankly, we'll likely find them from intel from either Republican Guard officers who are trying to save their skins, or else scientists like Hamsa who were never thrilled to be working for the regime to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 Originally posted by TheKurp Kilmer, You're going to have to assemble a better response than that if you're going to garner any respectability. There's no spin to it. It's a legitimate question. This is a mile from Iran's border in the north which places the al Qaeda camp squarely in the midst of U.N. sanctioned Kurdish territory. The Kurds had nothing to do with these guys. They have been helping us to wipe them out. Don't you watch the news? "You're going to have to assemble a better response than that if you're going to garner any respectability" :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 Mad Mike, Read up my man. The political situation in northern Iraq is hard to follow, changes on a dime, and wacky on top of it all. The Kurds are hardly unified. Two main political parties are the PKK and the PUK. The Taliban have been known to aid the PKK in their fight against the PUK to control northern Iraq. Now I ask you, in jest of course, is there an established link between al Qaeda and the Taliban? If A=B, and B=C, then doesn't it stand to reason that A=C? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by Tarhog What puzzles me is the general undertone of this conversation in which I almost perceive a desire to ridicule as 'mindlessly follwoing the Bush administration line' those that believe as I do, that Hussein is a bloodthirsty thug who has got bad bad weapons and lies about nearly every criminal action he's ever taken. If there is naivete here, I have to believe it exists in the minds of those that see a murdering tyrant in front of them, even acknowledge him as such, but argue we must have proof that will stand up in US courts in order to confront him. They are going to find some terrible things, and that will end this particular conversation. But we have a lot of Republican Guard to send on their way first. Tarhog, You've admitted puzzlement so I'll make clear where I stand. The Bush Administration did not go into this war with solid evidence of WMDs and Saddam's ties to al Qaeda. Instead, moral convictions were established sans that evidence and we've engaged in a war with Saddam's regime on that foundation. Kilmer and others who suggest that there's clear evidence of WMDs and Saddam's cavorting with al Qaeda when none exists to date, are really admitting that our convictions alone don't justify our military action. I happen to think that it doesn't matter if we find WMDs, and it's even less important to establish a tie between Saddam and al Qaeda. Frankly speaking, our integrity as Americans is weakened when we grasp at loose evidence and proclaim confirmation of WMDs and al Qaeda ties. What's wrong with standing strong on our belief that the world will be better off without Saddam's evil regime in power? The rest, if it comes to fruition, will simply be frosting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by TheKurp It means that Baghdad is a city with 5 million people. Don't you think it's a stretch that Saddam has tabs on all visitors in and out of Baghdad? . . . I think what's known is that al-Zarqawi showed up at a Baghdad hospital, got treatment for a shattered leg, and then left Iraq. You show me a link that states Saddam knew of his presence in Iraq and I'll stand corrected. Remember now, I'll actually read the link you provide so don't fabricate the text, okay? I've stayed out of this thus far, but I have to interject here. The nature of that regime is that they have eyes and ears everywhere. While someone might conceivably cross the border and check into a hospital without them knowing, he would not have stayed their long without them finding out. And of course it begs the question anyway: why would a non-Iraqi, al Qaeda affiliated terrorist go to Baghdad (suffering from medical shortages after years of UN sanctions) to receive treatment? Valid points, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by TheKurp What's wrong with standing strong on our belief that the world will be better off without Saddam's evil regime in power? The rest, if it comes to fruition, will simply be frosting. Kurp, the problem with that is that that's never been our position. While we certainly have argued that regime change is good in general, even the most ardent Bush Doctrine supporters aren't suggesting that every bad regime needs to be ousted. What makes this one a candidate for receiving the business end of our military might is that it threatens its neighbors and us, particularly with WMD's. That, plus its ties with terrorism mean that we simply can't wait around for that regime to decide it's ready for a showdown with us. I don't like the detestable leader of Zimbabwe who's decimating the country and economy by persecuting white farmers in the name of black reparations. The world would be better off without that regime too. I just don't think that that situation is worth the expense and violence that our military might would bring. See the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted April 5, 2003 Author Share Posted April 5, 2003 Just like a jury doesnt need a video of a crime to convict a man of murder, I dont need to see an actual WMD to prove to me that he has them. There is plenty of evidence. If it's not enough for you, fine. I asked Kurp to tell me what would suffice for him, and for him it is nothing short of an actual weapon. Fair enough. I just dont need for it to go that far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by redman I've stayed out of this thus far, but I have to interject here. The nature of that regime is that they have eyes and ears everywhere. While someone might conceivably cross the border and check into a hospital without them knowing, he would not have stayed their long without them finding out. And of course it begs the question anyway: why would a non-Iraqi, al Qaeda affiliated terrorist go to Baghdad (suffering from medical shortages after years of UN sanctions) to receive treatment? Valid points, no? Redman, let me ask an honest question... In my mind, I would guess that it's safe to say that at some point an Al Quaeda member has received medical treatment of some kind in the US, does that mean the US is harboring terrorists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted April 5, 2003 Author Share Posted April 5, 2003 That's a big leap. Our hospitals arent controlled like those in Baghdad. Now if they got treatment at Bethesda Naval Hospital, you may have a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by The Codeman Redman, let me ask an honest question... In my mind, I would guess that it's safe to say that at some point an Al Quaeda member has received medical treatment of some kind in the US, does that mean the US is harboring terrorists? Not unless you equate Iraq under Saddam with America. Last I checked, we don't support terrorists and we don't have secret police who are expected to keep tabs on every last patient in every last hospital bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Kilmer and Redman, those are both fair answers.. But I personally have not been to Bagdad or Iraq and I just find it hard to believe that millions upon millions of people can all be kept track of in the way you are speaking. IF there are that many people on Saddam's side, who are we trying to free? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted April 5, 2003 Author Share Posted April 5, 2003 Code, not to sound flippant, but look at what the USSR was able to accomplish in the largest country in the world? They had a file on EVERYONE. Literally, EVERYONE who lived in the USSR. It's not only possible, it's one of the reasons we should be ridding the world of this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by Kilmer17 Code, not to sound flippant, but look at what the USSR was able to accomplish in the largest country in the world? They had a file on EVERYONE. Literally, EVERYONE who lived in the USSR. It's not only possible, it's one of the reasons we should be ridding the world of this guy. I see where you are coming from, but even in USSR, I still doubt they could keep tabs like that.. heck, they couldn't catch a serial killer who was a party member until he had racked up 80 or more bodies.. I think his name was Andre Chikatilo... If they couldn't keep up with him, how are they going to catch an unassuming terrorist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by The Codeman Kilmer and Redman, those are both fair answers.. But I personally have not been to Bagdad or Iraq and I just find it hard to believe that millions upon millions of people can all be kept track of in the way you are speaking. IF there are that many people on Saddam's side, who are we trying to free? I'll say it differently than Kilmer. That it's hard to believe doesn't make it impossible, but rather despicable. And BTW I'm pretty sure that all health care, just like everything else in Iraq, was socialized. Who paid for that treatment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by redman I'll say it differently than Kilmer. That it's hard to believe doesn't make it impossible, but rather despicable. And BTW I'm pretty sure that all health care, just like everything else in Iraq, was socialized. Who paid for that treatment? I totally agree that it's possible... All I'm saying is that I don't think it hard to believe that it went un noticed either. I also wasn't trying to say the US was harboring terrorist, I just was using that as an example, don't want anyone to get the wrong idea...:cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted April 5, 2003 Author Share Posted April 5, 2003 On a tangent. There was a great HBO (I Think) movie about that guy. They didnt catch him becuse they refused to believe that human nature would allow that. That belief also led to the demise of the USSR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by Kilmer17 On a tangent. There was a great HBO (I Think) movie about that guy. They didnt catch him becuse they refused to believe that human nature would allow that. That belief also led to the demise of the USSR. Citizen X.. I agree, that was a great movie.. There's a pic of that guy on the net somewhere of him during the trial sitting in a cage... that guy was creepy.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by The Codeman Kilmer and Redman, those are both fair answers.. But I personally have not been to Bagdad or Iraq and I just find it hard to believe that millions upon millions of people can all be kept track of in the way you are speaking. IF there are that many people on Saddam's side, who are we trying to free? Code. WE knew about it and it's not our country. Try to use some logic here. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Citizen X=Andrei Chikatilo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Originally posted by Mad Mike Code. WE knew about it and it's not our country. Try to use some logic here. :doh: Come on Mike, you mean to tell me that there never were things that we knew about that the USSR didn't that went on in their own country? I bet there are somethings that they might know about that we don't.... Wouldn't you agree that our CIA is light years above the ICBIA (Iraqi Camel Back Intelligence Assoc.....:laugh: ) For God's sake, I would hope we know about it before they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phanatic Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Reading this thread has caused a tremendous headache. I think the point here is missed. There is a general belief that "most" governments work for the greater humanity, when in fact they are seeking the advancement of their country. This MUST be understood when asssesing the motives of a particular nation. Do you believe that we are afforded ALL of the information that our government has on this war? If you do may I suggest you try to drown yourself in a puddle. We are the lone superpower in the world and our government will seek to keep this postion even in the face of envious and self promoting nations. Ask yourself this question. If there must be one nation that is going to be the keeper of the world, who do you want it to be? We are not perfect but we do what is necessary to keep the relative peace WE have created. Remember, we contribute 25% of the overall UN budget. Without us, the over 100 other nations within the cooalition would fall. Our troops are deployed all over the world and for this reason there is peace. Without our military this would not be. Again I ask you, what nation would you want to assume the role of the worlds caretaker? If your answer is a unified body of nations you are wrong. Capitalism is the very backbone of our strength. Socialism is what has caused the degradation of France and their inability to act on their own. All I am saying is give war a chance and watch what happens in the middle east when Iraq becomes the richest nation in the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phanatic Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 I hope this will link. We can bring alot to the muslim communtity and many Iraqi's within our country are going back to eucate those on what "peace" is. Remember history has shown that peace is almost always achieved through victory on the battlefield. You must remove the tyrants in order for the message to work. Hasn't anyone noticed the fear instilled in the Iraqi citizens? I remember the third day of the war when a Iraqi woman greeted our soldiers with hugs and kisses, clenching her hands together. A bystander motioned to her as in a manner depicting a throat being cut. And people are protesting us? Heres the link that I hope will work. It will make you smile. msnbc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phanatic Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Ok it will not link. Click this link and then click on the april 4 photo gallery. Whenin that gallery click the 16th picture and then click the video icon to the middle right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.