PDA

View Full Version : Gulf War 2 has begun


peter2002
Feb 12, 2003, 10:57 PM
I was off by just 1 day. US Special Forces are on the ground, inside Iraq, laying the groundwork for the all out invasion to follow after the all out bombing of Baghdad. Optimal time is March 2, the date of the new moon.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A331-2003Feb12.html

Kid Red
Feb 12, 2003, 11:21 PM
Wow, didn't know that. Well, at least this way fewer civilian casualties should occur. Saddam can't lie about a hospital being bombed instead of a supply warehouse. Where do you get March 2nd from? And what's the moon have to do with it?

sidenote- I'm more concerned with The Korean War 2

3rdpath
Feb 12, 2003, 11:36 PM
i read that special forces were in iraq last week..the washington post is a little slow on the draw.

and depending on the definition of "special forces"...we've probably had people in iraq for quite some time....

nevertheless, the slow churning gears of the hamburger grinder have begun to turn......

Sedulous
Feb 13, 2003, 01:03 AM
BRUSSELS, Belgium (CNN) -- U.S. lawmakers Wednesday blasted three NATO members who refused to go along with a U.S.-backed proposal to protect Turkey, NATO's only Islamic partner, from Iraq. "Had it not been for our military commitment, France, Germany and Belgium today would be Soviet Socialist Republics,"

Anyone else find this ironic and at the same time suggest US history isn't well taught? If it wasn't for France, it is doubtful the United States would not have won it's independence from Britain? Yet now, the British are one of the strongest supporters of the US?

And maybe this is off topic but WHAT IS UP WITH N. KOREA!?!

kiwi
Feb 13, 2003, 01:53 AM
Originally posted by Sedulous
BRUSSELS, Belgium (CNN) -- U.S. lawmakers Wednesday blasted three NATO members who refused to go along with a U.S.-backed proposal to protect Turkey, NATO's only Islamic partner, from Iraq. "Had it not been for our military commitment, France, Germany and Belgium today would be Soviet Socialist Republics,"

Anyone else find this ironic and at the same time suggest US history isn't well taught? If it wasn't for France, it is doubtful the United States would not have won it's independence from Britain? Yet now, the British are one of the strongest supporters of the US?

And maybe this is off topic but WHAT IS UP WITH N. KOREA!?!

It's not so much Britain 'supporting' the US in whatever we do, even though that's how it may appear. It's more this specific campaign with Iraq (whatever it's actual multiple agendas really are).

The English in particular have been attached to the so-called 'middle east' fro a long time, especially after they carved it up into little 'nations' like Kuwait, that runs more like a corporation. Any time the US announces it wants to bludgeon Iraq, the British really get salivating. This is nothing new. Iraq has frequently claimed Kuwait as part of Iraq for decades since the english redrew the maps in the 19th century. The English went in and kicked Iraq out of the newly independent (from England) Kuwait back in 1961.

The English even gave us those geo reference terms - near, far and middle east from their colonial days and we all still insist on using them like it is a necessary convention like England's greenwich mean time. East of where? That's right, England.

Think also British Petroleum and you're getting there...

macfan
Feb 13, 2003, 02:22 AM
The British may have given us the term Middle East, but the US military calls the area Southwest Asia.

For the person who made the comment in the CNN article about Germany and France being Soviet Republics, never mind Soviet republics. If it hadn't been for our military commitment, France and the rest of Western Europe, and maybe the Soviet Union, would be Germany colonies or something. Living space, I think, was the concept.

For whatever reason, we were more than able to put aside our differences with the British from 200 years ago. We paid whatever debt we owed to France long ago when we bailed them out during WWI. What the US is trying to do is to pressure the French and Germans through the back door.

And maybe this is off topic but WHAT IS UP WITH N. KOREA!?!

North Korea is a failed state that more resembles a religious cult. They are on the verge of collapse and are seeking to blackmail the US and the world into supporting them with money and food. At the same time, the only industry they have is military hardware, mostly missiles.

mcrain
Feb 13, 2003, 08:09 AM
Originally posted by macfan
At the same time, the only industry they have is military hardware, mostly missiles.

CNN reported that N. Korea has an untested nuclear ballistic missile capable of reaching the west coast of the U.S.

chabig
Feb 13, 2003, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by Kid Red
And what's the moon have to do with it?

When there is a new moon, it's dark. We love to fight in the dark because it gives us a tremendous advantage.

Chris

Silencio
Feb 13, 2003, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by kiwi
Think also British Petroleum and you're getting there...

BP, at least for the gasoline they sell in the United States, doesn't get its petroleum from the Middle East. IIRC, they get the vast majority of their oil from the North Sea.

In fact, only 10% of the petroleum sold in the US comes from the Middle East: most of it comes from Canada, Mexico, and South America.

This war is less about oil and more a smokescreen for Shrubco's failed campaign against Al Qaida and OBL.

I fully agree with everyone else: we should be far more worried about North Korea.

chabig
Feb 13, 2003, 02:25 PM
Originally posted by Silencio
I fully agree with everyone else: we should be far more worried about North Korea.

Let's take one step at a time. After we solve the Iraq problem, I think North Korea will be next. The administration is well aware of the North Korean threat. Remember the exis of evil speech?

Skandranon
Feb 13, 2003, 05:13 PM
March 2nd is my birthday. Great. I'll be toasting to my 21 years of age on the dawn of the next great World War.

:eek:

charboneau
Feb 13, 2003, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by chabig


Let's take one step at a time. After we solve the Iraq problem, I think North Korea will be next.
Solve the Iraq problem? Just what sort of problem is a devastated, impoverished country that we've been bombing for twelve years?

If you think they will somehow attack us, I pity you. That would mean instant ruin; think Saddam doesn't care about job security?

Inspectors are on the ground looking for the weapons we sold them in the 80s.

Meanwhile Osama bin Laden who we trained and funded is still free. Afghanistan, which we "liberated" from the Taliban (who we funded, armed and got their training from the CIA) is now once again ruled by local warlords and Americans troops are being killed there. Is that problem solved?

So going after Iraq will solve problems?

mymemory
Feb 13, 2003, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by Silencio
In fact, only 10% of the petroleum sold in the US comes from the Middle East: most of it comes from Canada, Mexico, and South America.


The only country in South America is Venezuela that used to fill the 15% of the US oil inventories, not any more since december. All our oil is going directly to Cuba, the little we produce now after the oil strike.

Kid Red
Feb 13, 2003, 07:33 PM
Originally posted by chabig


When there is a new moon, it's dark. We love to fight in the dark because it gives us a tremendous advantage.

Chris

Ah. And the military plan covert ops around the new moon?

chabig
Feb 13, 2003, 09:24 PM
And the military plan covert ops around the new moon?

Yes, they do.

MrMacMan
Feb 13, 2003, 09:42 PM
Originally posted by Skandranon
March 2nd is my birthday. Great. I'll be toasting to my 21 years of age on the dawn of the next great World War.

:eek:

Mine is March 7th.

I'll be celebrating. I'm inviting all my friends for a HAPPY WAR PARTY!

TMay
Feb 13, 2003, 10:24 PM
You all amaze me with your comments! You appear to be getting your news outside of the great BS merchants (CNN, FOX, CBS, ABC, et al). Proof positive, I think, that the internet is a powerful force.

If only America (as a whole) were as literate...

Juventuz
Feb 14, 2003, 09:32 AM
Special Forces have been operating in Iraq since the Gulf War, it's nothing new.

Hell, Special Forces are currently operating in more countries than most people think.

markomarko
Feb 14, 2003, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by Kid Red
Wow, didn't know that. Well, at least this way fewer civilian casualties should occur. Saddam can't lie about a hospital being bombed instead of a supply warehouse. Where do you get March 2nd from? And what's the moon have to do with it?

sidenote- I'm more concerned with The Korean War 2

Fewer civilian casualties...when they're attacked at night and without warning? Please tell me you're joking.

macfan
Feb 14, 2003, 03:12 PM
Fewer civilian casualties...when they're attacked at night and without warning? Please tell me you're joking.

Two things. First, they aren't attacking civilians. Second, yes, special forces directing airstrikes and fighting at night when most people are at home in their beds = fewer civilian casualties than carpet bombing downtown Bagdhad in the middle of the afternoon.