saddam appearing to be backing down

Discussion in 'Community' started by jefhatfield, Dec 8, 2002.

  1. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #1
    for the first time, iraq has seemed to really look like they want to "back down" in this staring contest across the sand

    in the gulf war, they tried to take on the usa with high expectations, but now it looks like war can truly be avoided

    if bush goes to war against saddam without any real provocation and a country backing down and agreeing with the UN, then bush won't get my vote in 2004

    some have called the usa warmongers and i would not have agreed with that assessment...unless W takes it on his own against world opinion and launches a private war against iraq

    what will the president use for his justification?
     
  2. Over Achiever macrumors 68000

    Over Achiever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Toledo, OH, formerly Twin Cities, MN
    #2
    "Appearances can be decieving."

    "Don't judge a book by its cover."

    "Screw what everyone else thinks."
     
  3. krossfyter macrumors 601

    krossfyter

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Location:
    secret city
    #3

    ha hah este vato!
     
  4. jefhatfield thread starter Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #4
    i think the us navy alone could pose a serious airborne conventional threat with their two carrier battle groups

    ...not to mention the stealthier, faster, and more firepower packed land based planes of the usaf striking from all sides

    i think, this time, saddam knows we mean business

    if he does not comply, he will be out of power just like the taliban
     
  5. krossfyter macrumors 601

    krossfyter

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Location:
    secret city
    #5

    very true.


    backing down to continue to fund terrorists against u.s. and build palaces for himself. he has wieghed his options and the material world and terrorist support against u.s. was heavier then his pride i guess.
     
  6. markomarko macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2002
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    #6
    There is no credible evidence that Saddam supports international terrorism. He has offered money to the families of suicide bombers in Palestine. That is not a link to international terrorism, nor a threat to the US. You seem to rely on myth and official rumor for your political views and that you, as an American citizen, are so easily deluded, frightens me more than anything else on this planet.
     
  7. drastik macrumors 6502a

    drastik

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2002
    Location:
    Nashvegas
    #7
    The president is going to use secret evidence for his justification, unless he goes public with it, as Senators from both sides of the ailse are asking that he do.

    The white house is in a position to share or not share information wth the public or other countries. The GAO's case on the energy policy papers was overturned yesterday, setting precedent that the adminstrations can legally remain secret.

    The justification will be his actions in the past, supposed reason to shift US foriegn policy to a strike first stance, something this country has never done, and no civilized nation on earth does currently.
     
  8. topicolo macrumors 68000

    topicolo

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Location:
    Ottawa, ON
    #8
    The phrase "secret evidence" seems so obsurd to me that it could almost be labelled an oxymoron. What's the point of evidence if it is kept secret? Who are the US going to prove Iraq's wrongdoing to? themselves? lol

    It's like bush saying "I have just proved to myself that Iraq is a mean, mean country and so I'm giving myself the authority to order an all-out attack on it"
     
  9. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #9
    to give it a more personal feel, how would you like it if the gov't accused you of drug trafficking, based on secret evidence that they wouldn't show you or anyone else, and then tossed you in jail?
     
  10. krossfyter macrumors 601

    krossfyter

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Location:
    secret city
    #10



    hey buddy.... its called "my opinion".... not an "absolute truth".
    ....likewise with your view.

    if you dont like my views and they frighten you that much... ignore my posts.

    that simple.
     
  11. Timothy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2002
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #11
    It's the economy, stupid!

    Saddam is a threat to me? Not nearly as much of a threat as is the economy. Bush is playing hide-the-ball and trying, desperately, to keep the American focus off of the economy.

    Saddam is not a nice guy. The world is full of guys who are not nice, and yes, we have to keep tabs on them. But, to fight a war, lose American lives, and spend in excess of $100 billion dollars ($1600 for every american family of 4, or $16,000 for every Iraqi family) is just plain ridiculous. Let's use some of the intellectual reserver this country is famous for and come up with a more effective alternative to war; I'm confident we can, and equally confident that War with Iraq, while perhaps having some minimal immediate impact, will do nothing to stabilize the Middle East and our relationships there.

    This is a war of politics and personal revenge for George W. Bush. That anyone in America is buying it disturbs me.
     
  12. krossfyter macrumors 601

    krossfyter

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Location:
    secret city
    #13
    Re: It's the economy, stupid!


    on a side note: regardless of what we do or anyone does in any way.. the stablization of the middle east is perhaps impossible. it just may be the single most complex problem facing human kind.


    on the topic at hand: what you said could be true.... but i dont think its that easy to pin it down to just a "revenge issue".... if 9/11 hadnt happen.. then yeah man i would agree with you.... but not now.. there is just too many varibles at work here.



    but then again you could be right.... at least in part.
     

Share This Page