if we handed things completely over to the un things would be far worse. they have almost completely pulled out of afgan not because the job is done but because a few people have been killed by taliban. they really made a weak statement with that. why pull out if the job is not done. and even worse why let the un run us troops when all they do is sit there while thier troops get taken out?
Iraq governed by the UN!!??/ Please stop I'm laughing so hard now my ribs are aching...Is this the same UN that couldnt even enforce any of its mandates during Saddams reign of terror . the same UN that Saddam snubbed his nose at,, the same UN that -no i cant go on any more it 'l never end . lol . -The UN 's strongest power now is its financial ability in my opinion its outdated and is morphing into the old league of nations.. -BBG
Originally posted by chancremechanicWell, I checked the last 7 days of news on CNN, Fox and the Telegraph, and I found no stories reporting a link between Al-Queda and Saddam Hussein prior to the invasion. I wouldn't be surprised if Al-Queda and other terrorist organizations have move in to Iraq after the invasion succeeded in toppling Hussein's regime, but I didn't find any stories on that either. I would be interested in finding this story you're talking about, given that it would serve to diffuse the objections of those pesky liberals who allege they were lied to by Bush concerning the pre-invasion relationship between Al-Queda and Iraq. You further assistance is appreciated.
I saw the news a couple of days ago on FOX and CNN, but here is a link if you're interested...what do you think?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main ...looks like a UK source...
Any other opinions out there?
Originally posted by bbarr😵
I would be interested in finding this story you're talking about, given that it would serve to diffuse the objections of those pesky liberals who allege they were lied to by Bush concerning the pre-invasion relationship between Al-Queda and Iraq. You further assistance is appreciated.
Unrelated: Are you on the outs with Immanuel or has my avatar web site sh1t the bed?
I feel sad reading so many posts from american people showing us "rest of the world" that they really have no idea what is going on in their country.
My earlier posts in this thread were not serious because i couldnt imagine that you guys were serious too, when you were saying that war in Iraq was what we all needed to stop terrorism etc etc.
But now i see you are quite serious.... and you really believe it....
And this scares me very much because US can do a lot of damage in the world, and you guys show me that this is exactly what is gonna happen
Originally posted by FrauHolleAgreed. I apologize if I'm guilty by association :'(.
I feel sad reading so many posts from american people showing us "rest of the world" that they really have no idea what is going on in their country.
My earlier posts in this thread were not serious because i couldnt imagine that you guys were serious too, when you were saying that war in Iraq was what we all needed to stop terrorism etc etc.
But now i ...[text shortened]... o a lot of damage in the world, and you guys show me that this is exactly what is gonna happen
Originally posted by bluebabygirlHmm, I'm surprised no one has pulled you up on this yet.
Old ye of little faith . America had no choice but to finally take a stand against terrorists and against so damn insane - better known as Saddam Hussein.I fully support our going to war and our remaining there to see it concluded rig ...[text shortened]... ill fall for anything . I think many of you forgot to stand !-BBG
Iraq had very little, if anything at all, to do with terrorism. Not for a long, long time anyway. Saddam and his administration had no proven links with the 11/9 attacks (you didn't actually say this but I'm guessing that's what you were referring to, please correct me if I'm wrong). Saddam and Bin Laden didn't like each other at all. Bin Laden’s hatred of the U.S would not have been enough to override this, since he obviously had other willing allies in the Middle East.
In short, the present war in Iraq was not about terrorism. If he had developed illegal weapons he may have considered passing them on to terrorist groups, but I find that unlikely as he would have been risking his neck in the process. Saddam is not crazy and is not the kind of person who would throw his life away. Power is more important to him. As it turns out Saddam either wasn't producing weapons or he just happens to be the Hide and Seek champion of the Middle East. If my Dad was half as good at hiding things I would have had some very unhappy and hungry Easter mornings.
you think americans dont know whats going on in our country? i agree some of us dont but the general assumption you are making is laughable. are you iinsulting our intellegence? id wager to say i for one know exactly whats going on. just because you dont agree with some of our opinions does not mean that we have no clue as to the state of our foreign affairs. i am suprised someone as smart as yourself would even say something like that
Originally posted by usmc7257Are you replying to FrauHolle? It's less confusing if you use 'Reply and Quote'.
you think americans dont know whats going on in our country? i agree some of us dont but the general assumption you are making is laughable. are you iinsulting our intellegence? id wager to say i for one know exactly whats going on. just because you dont agree with some of our opinions does not mean that we have no clue as to the state of our foreign affairs. i am suprised someone as smart as yourself would even say something like that
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
Originally posted by ivanhoeLeave it to the UN, its why they are there.
A interesting question for all of you: What policy would you have chosen towards Saddam Hussein, considering the fact that he was not willing to meet the demands of the United Nations ?
Andrew