Most Americans support a nuclear reatliation....WHAT?!?

Faust · Post by **Faust** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:10 am

here.... look at this.......

http://www.msnbc.com/news/848755.asp?pne=11947&0ct=-300 .

WHAT!?!? where did they take survey/poll.... a Methadone clinic?

why am i having such a hard time believing "Americans" would be that dense. OK, maybe overzealous, but c'mon! it's like burning down your apartment complex in order to get rid of the ants in your kitchen.

Paft · Post by **Paft** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:24 am

Come to my high school if you want a good example of what this poll talks about. I'd say the figures were even higher, in my town at least. More like 8 in 10.

It's really sad when people are so brainwashed that they percieve that America is perfect and everyone else is less than we are.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:32 am

"if Hussein orders use of chemical or biological weapons on U.S. troops"

I believe in payback with a greater force than used against me. If someone punches me, I don't merely slap them back.

cobra25 · Post by **cobra25** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:39 am

wouldn't it be even smarter to prevent the use of bio weapons and the likes on US troops and use some nukes right away??

Hell if they nuke the whole world except the US all your problems will be solved...

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 8:25 am

Let the damn weapons inspectors do their job and let's wait and see what they come up with. They will report back to the UN in January I believe and they will provide insight as to what Iraq has been doing all these years. Plus, the Iraqi declaration is being reviewed and it will corroborate what the UN Team finds or doesn't find.

As for talk of nuclear weapons.....

You all know or should know by now that I'm in the military....I have been on the front lines before and I'll probably be there again.

Let me ask you naysayers face to face, man to man right now.....

Will you tell my little girl that her Daddy was killed after REPEATED exposures to chemical and biological weapons used by the Iraqi regime and YOU knowingly CHOSE NOT TO RESPOND to stop the attacks?

Will you do that for me?????

Ya know.....it really makes me feel great that you guys just think of me as a piece of expendable meat.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 8:45 am

Dear god, I hope it doesn't come to that.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:04 am

In my opinion, the UN inspector thing is a joke and waste of time and money. You think Iraq, or whoever comes under inspection, if they are secretly making weapons....you really think that they're reveal them.

UN Inspector: "Hey Saddam, are you making weapons that we told you not to make?"

Saddam: "Errr....uhhhmmm....well, OKAAAAAAY, you caught me.....here they are."
///leads them to top secret factory///

Riiiight.

I'd say that if someone wants to make, or acquire weapons they are not allowed to have, I'd say there's a pretty good chance that they'll do that in secret, and not reveal it to some UN Inspector.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:08 am

I agree with you YOSC. Its my opinion we are doing it to play ball with the U.N. because its the politically correct thing to do.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:09 am

Originally posted by Distinct
In my opinion, the UN inspector thing is a joke and waste of time and money. You think Iraq, or whoever comes under inspection, if they are secretly making weapons....you really think that they're reveal them.

UN Inspector: "Hey Saddam, are you making weapons that we told you not to make?"

Saddam: "Errr....uhhhmmm....well, OKAAAAAAY, you caught me.....here they are."
///leads them to top secret factory///

Riiiight.

I'd say that if someone wants to make, or acquire weapons they are not allowed to have, I'd say there's a pretty good chance that they'll do that in secret, and not reveal it to some UN Inspector.

They are there to confirm what intel has been discovered from above....and to make everyone feel better about attacking him. It makes it seem more palatable that we did everything in our power to prevent war.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:10 am

Of course they won't revel them...but if they are making them, and I have no doubt they are...the systems used to detect the various chemicals and so forth have evolved a lot since the Gulf War..

Agrees with UOD..let's see what happens...

One thing the PR team did right at the White House is all this blustering....

Where's Bin Laden?

Joint Chiefs of Staff · Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:18 am

Originally posted by downhill

Where's Bin Laden?

He's hiding right along with the Iraqi's weapons of mass destruction.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:22 am

By JCOS

He's hiding right along with the Iraqi's weapons of mass destruction.

Clever

Ok...which one has attacked the US of A?

It's a smokescreen to prop up approval points...imho..Even Tent..(CIA) has an opinion that Sadam isn't much of a threat here, unless provoked........(All accounts say Bush was frothing.)

Joint Chiefs of Staff · Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:25 am

Originally posted by downhill
Ok...which one has attacked the US of A?

It's a smokescreen to prop up approval points...imho..

Bin Laden of course.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:33 am

Originally posted by UOD
and to make everyone feel better about attacking him. It makes it seem more palatable that we did everything in our power to prevent war.

True point you have there.....guess we have to go throught the steps.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:33 am

Originally posted by downhill
Clever

Ok...which one has attacked the US of A?

It's a smokescreen to prop up approval points...imho..Even Tent..(CIA) has an opinion that Sadam isn't much of a threat here, unless provoked........(All accounts say Bush was frothing.)

that doesnt matter Downhill. People like Hussein shouldn't be in power. 9/11 was a big reason why the public favors ousting Hussein. Any President worth his salt would take that and go get the fool. Matter of fact, and President we have had before and now would have done so IMO.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:37 am

Originally posted by Roody
that doesnt matter Downhill. People like Hussein shouldn't be in power. 9/11 was a big reason why the public favors ousting Hussein. Any President worth his salt would take that and go get the fool. Matter of fact, and President we have had before and now would have done so IMO.

Agreed..but who's to decide on who stays in power and who leaves?

Are we in the view of the world, now the USSR? Something to mull over.

I'm all for other countries getting some backbone..

And still, if the CIA director dosn't see him as a threat to us...

And who pays for all of this? Who gains and who will loose? (Refering only to Americans)

cobra25 · Post by **cobra25** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:38 am

Originally posted by UOD
Let the damn weapons inspectors do their job and let's wait and see what they come up with. They will report back to the UN in January I believe and they will provide insight as to what Iraq has been doing all these years. Plus, the Iraqi declaration is being reviewed and it will corroborate what the UN Team finds or doesn't find.

As for talk of nuclear weapons.....

You all know or should know by now that I'm in the military....I have been on the front lines before and I'll probably be there again.

Let me ask you naysayers face to face, man to man right now.....

Will you tell my little girl that her Daddy was killed after REPEATED exposures to chemical and biological weapons used by the Iraqi regime and YOU knowingly CHOSE NOT TO RESPOND to stop the attacks?

Will you do that for me?????

Ya know.....it really makes me feel great that you guys just think of me as a piece of expendable meat.

Who said that there should be no response... but should the response be as severe as a nuke??

Will you go to Iraq after the US blows up half the country with a nuke and explain to the little boys and girls over there why there fathers / brothers / sisters died??

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:51 am

Roody,

People like Saddam ARE in power and it's because the people he rules over are NOT fed up with him. If they were, they would rebel at ALL costs....just like our forefathers did over 200 years ago.

The US should not dictate to any other country it's own internal policies.....all we should be doing is showing these countries how to be good neighbors to eachother.

With that said, when a regime gets out of control and threatens the security of it's neighbors, then we have a DUTY to respond because it is the right thing to do and the human thing to do.

The problem with the world is that they see this mediation as bias.

So we are damned if we do and damned if we don't.

there are too my hypotheticals to all of this. Saddam could attack Israel tonight. What should our response be?

I believe that most of these countries need to grow a backbone and stand up for themselves...but here is the problem....if these countries won't stand up...then we face genocide because that is what it always boils down to. If we let these countries get run over, then it becomes this huge human rights issue where the world points at us for not stepping in. (Somalia) and when we do step in..it is usually too late. (Bosnia)

Again...time is not on our side. It used to be on our side but we had a leader...George Bush Sr., who lacked the decisiveness to get the damn job done right the first time.

So here we are....damned if we do and damned if we don't.

this should be a lesson to every would be leader.....ACT and ACT DECISIVELY!!!!!

SeedOfChaos · Post by **SeedOfChaos** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:04 am

First of all, I doubt there can really be a question of whether or not it would be a good thing if Saddam were out of power, the answer is too obvious IMO.

Let's get rid of him in a responsible way (read: neither nuking Iraq nor giving the Carlyle group billions of dollars), and then prevent it from happening again.

I got a few question that should be answered...

- Who helped Hussein to get to power?
- Who sold Hussein all those weapons?

There should be consequences for those. Those responsible for arms sale to Iraq could be seen as catering to terrorists, or not?

- Where is Bin Laden? (I STILL haven't seen any evidence that links him to the attacks... those false translation of the video are NOT proof to me)

I think the problem is less the US pointing fingers and asking for consequences. I think it is more the lack of proof that is pissing the rest of the world off a bit at the moment. All those grave accusations (which sound damn plausible enough) and accordingly severe punishment, but never any real proof. Only claims that the US has it. If they have it, then show it already. The world is waiting.

Finally.... what about North Korea? They ADMITTED that they have nukes.... they're in the "Axis of Evil" too, remember? Why not start with them?

I'll end this rant now...

Ronald

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:07 am

Originally posted by cobra25
Who said that there should be no response... but should the response be as severe as a nuke??

Will you go to Iraq after the US blows up half the country with a nuke and explain to the little boys and girls over there why there fathers / brothers / sisters died??

1. Would you allow us to respond in kind with our own bio/chemical weapons?

2. Yes I will. I will tell them EXACTLY the truth....that their leader Saddam Hussein used them to hide and use bio/chemical weapons, that he also used them as a human shield to cover-up these weapons, and that he stored them in their own backyards without regard for their own safety. I would also explain to them that their parents had over 10 years to oust Saddam despite the threat he posed to the world. I would also explain to them that the nuclear weapon was used after Saddam attacked American forces using chemical weapons which left many little boys and girls back in the US without a mommy or daddy.

SeedOfChaos · Post by **SeedOfChaos** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:11 am

Evan, you were there, so perhaps you can tell me....

The situation described in the movie "Three Kings", where the opposition was getting ready to get rid of Saddam and then the US pulled back. Is it acurate?

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:14 am

Originally posted by UOD
Roody,

People like Saddam ARE in power and it's because the people he rules over are NOT fed up with him. If they were, they would rebel at ALL costs....just like our forefathers did over 200 years ago.

actually its my opinion UOD that he is in power because of fear. As the pieces start to crumble his people will turn on him im sure. its no democracy over there, and people frankly wont speak out against him for fear of their own deaths. its my common knowledge for quite sometime that thats how it works in Iraq. So I will respectfully disagree with you UOD, it has in my opinion nothing to do with them not being fed up with him, it has to do with fear.

anyway, im off to LOTR so ill respond later if need be.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:16 am

Originally posted by SeedOfChaos
Evan, you were there, so perhaps you can tell me....

The situation described in the movie "Three Kings", where the opposition was getting ready to get rid of Saddam and then the US pulled back. Is it acurate?

Unfortunately...it is the truth. I was there when General Horner and Schwarzkopf both vowed that we would roll into Baghdad and kill Saddam....and then GO HOME. We had a Navy Seal team that was inserted at the beginning of the war and was shadowing Saddam.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:19 am

Originally posted by Roody
actually its my opinion UOD that he is in power because of fear. As the pieces start to crumble his people will turn on him im sure. its no democracy over there, and people frankly wont speak out against him for fear of their own deaths. its my common knowledge for quite sometime that thats how it works in Iraq. So I will respectfully disagree with you UOD, it has in my opinion nothing to do with them not being fed up with him, it has to do with fear.

anyway, im off to LOTR so ill respond later if need be.

Saddam was at his weakest at the end of the Gulf War....a boy scout troop could have overthrown him...yet his people chose to embrace him. Was that out of fear then?

Ghosthunter · Post by **Ghosthunter** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:46 am

That is why we need to oust houssein now before it comes to this.

But if houssein does use WOMD, by all means, lets make it so no one would ever wnt to use them again against us...

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:49 am

Originally posted by davy19
That is why we need to oust houssein now before it comes to this.

But if houssein does use WOMD, by all means, lets make it so no one would ever wnt to use them again against us...

My real worry is not that he will use them but rather who he will sell them to that will use them....and to me, it doesn't matter if it's against us or another peace loving nation. It is the right thing to do to stop people from having to suffer for no good reason.

Ghosthunter · Post by **Ghosthunter** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:57 am

Originally posted by UOD
My real worry is not that he will use them but rather who he will sell them to that will use them....and to me, it doesn't matter if it's against us or another peace loving nation. It is the right thing to do to stop people from having to suffer for no good reason.

Either way houssein needs to go...dont know what bush is waiting for.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 11:13 am

Originally posted by davy19
Either way houssein needs to go...dont know what bush is waiting for.

Hopefully, we are just waiting for the UN inspection team to finish it's work and then we should go in after him with a special ops team of some sort. I think that would be the right thing to do. The only option I see to avoid total war would be for Saddam to step down.

If he did that...I would believe it to be a genuine and sincere change of face.

But then again, there are so many variable to this equation.

In the end, it would be great to see a real change in Iraq. a government run by the people and one that respects human rights both internally and externally.

that is the goal here....I want the Iraqi people to live and prosper as they rightfully deserve.

Ghosthunter · Post by **Ghosthunter** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 11:31 am

Originally posted by UOD
Hopefully, we are just waiting for the UN inspection team to finish it's work and then we should go in after him with a special ops team of some sort. I think that would be the right thing to do. The only option I see to avoid total war would be for Saddam to step down.

If he did that...I would believe it to be a genuine and sincere change of face.

But then again, there are so many variable to this equation.

In the end, it would be great to see a real change in Iraq. a government run by the people and one that respects human rights both internally and externally.

that is the goal here....I want the Iraqi people to live and prosper as they rightfully deserve.

Amen to that

torsten · Post by **torsten** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 12:12 pm

Originally posted by UOD
My real worry is not that he will use them but rather who he will sell them to that will use them....and to me, it doesn't matter if it's against us or another peace loving nation. It is the right thing to do to stop people from having to suffer for no good reason.

That is the important point. The weapons being developed in Iraq will be sold or given to organizations like Al Qaeda and be used against a city near you. Does this awful scenario have to happen in order for people to finally GET IT? Or is it just acceptable to some that London, Washington, or NY will be destroyed? Perhaps if you live in rural America or Rotterdam it doesn't matter much to you. Think about this: what if the people with the brainwashed reflexive anti-American attitudes could be personally held accountable for the horrors that will come from these weapons produced in Iraq. If that were true, I don't think you'd be hearing the resentment-based stay-out-of-Iraq rhetoric that you do now.

cyberskye · Post by **cyberskye** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 12:37 pm

I wonder how many conversations just like this one took place in Europe in the 40's...

As for a lack of proof in the public domain - if you have a resource who is in or very close to what is going on over there, it is very possible that disclosing what they tell you will give away that source (probably killing him in the process). Once Iraq is forced to play their hand - i.e. this mammoth list that was provided - it may be easier to disclose the evidence. Make no mistake about it - this is a poker game.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 2:26 pm

Originally posted by UOD
Saddam was at his weakest at the end of the Gulf War....a boy scout troop could have overthrown him...yet his people chose to embrace him. Was that out of fear then?

matter of opinion I suppose. Two arguments to every story. Yes, I believe he has always ruled by fear.

Faust · Post by **Faust** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:16 pm

just to clarify my original intent....

act and act decisively? absolutely! without question. i beg consideration of any other method to achieve our goal/revenge..... just not nuclear weapons or other bio or chemical methods. the effects far outreach the purely destructive aspect.

we have the ability to exact our intent without becoming the greater of two evils.

EvilAngel · Post by **EvilAngel** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:46 pm

3 words... Prop - a - ganda... ok, whatever... one word

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 8:11 pm

I just found this....it's starting to look more like bluff..

Sanity rules...

http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2002/12/ ... dex.html?x

Bush decides no immediate war with Iraq

President Bush decided Wednesday he will condemn Iraq's weapons disclosure as full of omissions and deceptions but will not immediately assert that Saddam Hussein is in ‘‘material breach" of the United Nations -- a finding that could trigger war.

Instead, Bush plans to launch this week what aides called a deliberative process that would push the prospects for military action into next year, officials said. He will press the United Nations to demand interviews outside of Iraq with Saddam's weapons scientists, hoping they will reveal secrets that would bolster Bush's charges against Saddam.

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 8:25 pm

Saddam called Bush's bluff, and Bush blinked. He only blinked, he didn't close his eyes.
Another mistake by Saddam that will prove deadlier than Desert Storm.

Bush needs surprize on his side. He's setting the stage, now.

Check this out while you're at it.
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/12/18/sproje ... index.html

And consider this....
When war starts (not if), and the US is busy, the other "cats" around the globe may want to play too.

It could get very interesting very quick.

Annalysa · Post by **Annalysa** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:25 pm

Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky,
Imagine all the people
living for today...

Imagine there's no countries,
It isnt hard to do,
Nothing to kill or die for,
No religion too,
Imagine all the people
living life in peace...

Imagine no possesions,
I wonder if you can,
No need for greed or hunger,
A brotherhood of man,
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

You may say Im a dreamer,
but Im not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And the world will live as one.

Joint Chiefs of Staff · Wed Dec 18, 2002 9:33 pm

Originally posted by Annalysa
Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky,
Imagine all the people
living for today...

Imagine there's no countries,
It isnt hard to do,
Nothing to kill or die for,
No religion too,
Imagine all the people
living life in peace...

Imagine no possesions,
I wonder if you can,
No need for greed or hunger,
A brotherhood of man,
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

You may say Im a dreamer,
but Im not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And the world will live as one.

Outstanding!

Onethenumber2 · Post by **Onethenumber2** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 10:22 pm

its called mutually assured destruction

doesnt anyone study history these days?

He uses Chem and Bio Weapons we graciously use nukes instead of reltaliating with our own. We have the deadlist substance known to man weaponized, or the capability to make it weaponized very shortly.

Nukes in responce to Chems is very gracious!

Faust · Post by **Faust** » Thu Dec 19, 2002 6:05 am

Nukes in responce to Chems is very gracious

i wouldn't go so far as to say that. if anything, it;s on about the same level as bio/chem weapon deployment.

yes, i am sure we have the most powerful chemical and biological agents in ordinance form.... but radiation poisoning is awful and affects a wider area than just the arena of battle. and the contamination doesn;t exactly disappear overnight.

point's of interest..... Chernobyl and Bikini Atol.