View Full Version : Oh well, the bombs are dropping.
evildave
19th March 2003, 11:29 PM
No sense debating "whether we should".
Too late to second guess why.
Boom, boom, boom.
The Central Scrutinizer
19th March 2003, 11:52 PM
Originally posted by evildave
Boom, boom, boom.
John Lee Hooker!!! :D
armageddonman
20th March 2003, 01:21 AM
Well, bombs are falling, innocent and guilty people are dying.
I hope that those who support this war are happy now, knowing that the US don't give a sh*t for the opinion of the rest of the world.
Barkhorn1x
20th March 2003, 06:02 AM
...satisfied that the US COALITION of 35 nations has the gumption to do what must be done.
Barkhorn.
armageddonman
20th March 2003, 08:22 AM
Originally posted by Barkhorn1x
...satisfied that the US COALITION of 35 nations has the gumption to do what must be done.
Barkhorn.
35 nations? How many of those have actually troops ready to attack Iraq? Let me guess: 2?
Spain has declared NOT to sent fighting troops but only 900 soldiers for medical service.
What a great coalition that is.
Barkhorn1x
20th March 2003, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by armageddonman
What a great coalition that is.
Doesn't matter one wit how "great" it is - you act like this action is completely a US hegemonic act. That is just not true.
Barkhorn.
20th March 2003, 08:38 AM
Originally posted by Barkhorn1x
Doesn't matter one wit how "great" it is - you act like this action is completely a US hegemonic act. That is just not true.
Barkhorn.
And the fact that we would cut their foreign aid immediately if they didn't toe the line has no influence on them, I'm sure.
Aren't conservatives generally against letting the Federal Government bully states by withholding funds? ;)
patnray
20th March 2003, 08:44 AM
Yes, the bombs are falling. Although I have strongly opposed military action, I agree that the debate is over. Let us hope for a speedy end with a minimal loss of life on all sides.
Segnosaur
20th March 2003, 09:21 AM
Originally posted by sundog
And the fact that we would cut their foreign aid immediately if they didn't toe the line has no influence on them, I'm sure.
The idea that many of these coalition troops are only involved because the U.S. has promised aid is a very common criticism from the anti-war side. And while I admit that there may be a kernel of truth to it, I doubt that it explains their willingness to help.
If a country decides to join the coalition (either with troops, or with just a symbolic effort), I suspect that they are doing so either:
- Because their people support their effort
- Even though the people are currently against the war, the leaders realize that once Iraq is made democratic and people realize just how bad things were in Iraq, the people will realize "my goodness, maybe we should have gone in to help"
- The people are anti-war, but the leaders realize that going to war is the right thing to do, even if it means they may loose the next election
- They were promised aid from the U.S. for supporting the war
Now, my problem with this 'promised aid' argument - In a democratic country, part of the leader's goal is to get reelected. If a leader supports an unpopular war, there is a good chance they will get thrown out of office; thus, all of this 'aid' money will be of little or no help, and it is the successor government which will reap all of the benefits. (Not only would they have been the party which didn't go to war, they will get much of the economic benefit that that aid would produce.)
Tony
20th March 2003, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by armageddonman
I hope that those who support this war are happy now, knowing that the US don't give a sh*t for the opinion of the rest of the world.
Thats what makes me happiest, we finially have a president that doesnt kiss ass.
voidx
20th March 2003, 09:52 AM
There seems to be this idea that Bush thinks this attack is just a fantastic idea, that its a great thing to go and do. Anyway you look at it, it had to have been a very hard decision for him. He obviously recognizes the potential pitfalls of the plan, and the notion that it very well may not produce the result that he intends. But I give him credit for making a tough decision, in a tough situation, and seeing it through. He was not overwhelmed into doing nothing. I guess we'll all have to wait and see if his risk pays off.
gnome
20th March 2003, 09:54 AM
I'm with patnray. I am against the war, but now that it's actually started, may our troops serve with honor and give the Iraqi people a chance for a better life.
Let us be gracious in victory.
HarryKeogh
20th March 2003, 10:06 AM
when the first iraqi baby dies and someone comes up to us and says "I told you this would happen" with a smile on their face are we allowed to punch them in the face real hard-like?
Tony
20th March 2003, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by HarryKeogh
when the first iraqi baby dies and someone comes up to us and says "I told you this would happen" with a smile on their face are we allowed to punch them in the face real hard-like?
You got a paintball gun?
http://www.forum.scullyspost.com/images/smilies/hehehmn.gif http://www.forum.scullyspost.com/images/smilies/hehehmn.gif http://www.forum.scullyspost.com/images/smilies/hehehmn.gif http://www.forum.scullyspost.com/images/smilies/hehehmn.gif http://www.forum.scullyspost.com/images/smilies/hehehmn.gif http://www.forum.scullyspost.com/images/smilies/hehehmn.gif http://www.forum.scullyspost.com/images/smilies/hehehmn.gif http://www.forum.scullyspost.com/images/smilies/hehehmn.gif
Doctor X
20th March 2003, 10:13 AM
I would recommend being better men than the appeasers who do not know what they do.
They would allow the baby to be starved to death by Hussein.
--J.D.
subgenius
20th March 2003, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer
John Lee Hooker!!! :D
No, you need one more "Boom."
Used to see John Lee in the 60's at the Chessmate Club in Detroit.
Regnad Kcin
20th March 2003, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by Tony
Thats (sic) what makes me happiest, we finially (sic) have a president that (sic) doesnt (sic) kiss ass. Birds of a feather.
rikzilla
20th March 2003, 10:48 AM
What Time Is It? (http://www.funforwards.com/flash/september02/saddam.swf)
:D :D :D
Kodiak
21st March 2003, 08:06 AM
Originally posted by evildave
Too late to second guess why.
If you don't know why yet, it has to be by choice...
fishbob
21st March 2003, 08:29 AM
There seems to be this idea that Bush thinks this attack is just a fantastic idea, that its a great thing to go and do. Anyway you look at it, it had to have been a very hard decision for him. He obviously recognizes the potential pitfalls of the plan, and the notion that it very well may not produce the result that he intends. We hit that point some time ago, where we had no choice but to invade Iraq. Bush steered us directly to that point, running over all kinds of obstacles, when it would have been smarter to steer around them. His objectives had validity, but his methods will result in a long and messy clean up after Saddam is gone. It is good to not have a kiss ass prez, but it would be better if he were not also an ass.
Boom Boom Boom Boom, Hey Hey.
Tony
21st March 2003, 08:31 AM
Originally posted by Regnad Kcin
Birds of a feather.
So you like an ass kisser?
evildave
21st March 2003, 09:08 PM
Well, actually the point is, we're committed, and there's no way around it.
We set it in motion. We have to see it through to the end. It would be absolutely far more despicable if we don't see it through.
If the people have their way, and we PULL OUT, then all of it is for naught. Saddam gets to stay in power. Maybe slaughter the POWs we return (along with their extended families) for their weakness.
Everybody who spoke up and said "Yeah! Liberate us! FINALLY!" gets screwed.
kerfer
21st March 2003, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by evildave
Boom, boom, boom.
"Out Go the Lights!"
Troll
21st March 2003, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by sundog
And the fact that we would cut their foreign aid immediately if they didn't toe the line has no influence on them, I'm sure.
Aren't conservatives generally against letting the Federal Government bully states by withholding funds? ;)
Why do they need aid. why from the US? Withholding funds? You mean my tax dollars that I was not asked personally where I'd like them to go? How much aid do the UK and Austrailia get from the US? Don't they have troops committed?
Hey we give aid. We give money, food, weapons, we let you come and stay. Wanna get all thankless for it then yeah, it's time for the folks to cut you off and let you earn your own way through life.
You know I swear that some of these conservatives and ultra conservatives are indeed right. It's all about jealousy as to what the US has that they do not. we have and should just give? How much do you make? I'm not making an assload of cash right now and I totalled my car 2 weeks ago in an accident. If you make more than me you should just give me the balance until we're even. :rolleyes:
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.