Inoculator9 Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Does anyone here think that Iraq does have nuclear weapons? I personally don't think so, although I am leaning between have and don't have. I believe that Bush has pushed Iraq into an impossible position, Iraq can't prove it doesn't have nuclear weapons (atleast not to Bush's satisfaction), so it is up to America to prove that they do. Until we have proof I don't hink war is justified in the least.I know this has probably been discussed somewhere else, but I thought I would make the topic more specific. Just whether they have weapons or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rigel6669 Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 They will not find any weapons in iraq that will justify another war. But sadly enough, bush already decided to attack.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inoculator9 Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 Thats the way it is, Bush keeps turning things around. He makes a big show of troop movements to distract us from the fact that they haven't found anything to justify them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nampigai Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 I don't think they have nukes, but I think a war is comming anyway, the brits moved 26.000 troops, 120 tanks and a hangar down to the region. And Bush have been out asking for support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunenewt Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 They found canisters which were used for Nuclear weapon containment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inoculator9 Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 But 11 out of the 13 never contained any chemical weapons. This was proved definitively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunenewt Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 But still, as you pointed out, two didBTW:Was it chemical weapons then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inoculator9 Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 I'm inlcined to think that the two that had been used were leftovers from the Gulf War. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 I think the whole "UN-search-the-country-for-nukes" thing really sucks. I mean, what if I claimed Sweden was on bin Laden's side and we had nukes and biological weapons? What, where would you look for it? Those papers, that the UN got from Iraq, can contain as much sh_t as a toilet can, nothing is saying that it is true, but neither false on the other hand. What if they move them underground? I'm sure that USA has many secret bases, and even if the world "knows" about Area 51 (that it is secret, the alien thing is for you to decide), but what of the 100 others? Same thing Iraq: what if they have secret bases? What if only Saddam, most trusted generals and elite troops knows of them, and would only use them for national security? So yes, what the UN has done for now in Iraq, and what they will do either the last few days or the coming year in Iraq, will always be vain, waste of time and fooling around with civilization until the country accusing and the country accused comes up with a solution... the nearest: war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edric O Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Iraq has anything Bush says it has. And if you disagree, you're an evil terrorist. ::) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acriku Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 And you're part of the Axis of Evilllllll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilVirus Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Iraq most definetely has stashed up weapons of mass destruction - chemical and biological, but most likely no nukes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edric O Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 The Axis of Evil is now hiring! Does YOUR country meet the requirements to become part of our exclusive club?- a corrupt and power hungry leader- ineffective and/or faked election system- a highly manipulative media- displaying expansionist tendencies- posessing weapons of mass destruction- having actually used said weapons of mass destruction- disregarding UN resolutions- threatening several sovereign nations with unprovoked attack- blaming all or most internal instances of public violence on foreign agents- labeling all enemies of the state with a title that strikes fear into the population (e.g. "terrorist")Looks like the USA gets a 10 out of 10! Congratulations to our new members! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acriku Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 And Bush is the reason why some of those "criterias" are still applicable to the US. Hmm... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilVirus Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 - a corrupt and power hungry leader- ineffective and/or faked election system- a highly manipulative media- displaying expansionist tendencies- posessing weapons of mass destruction- having actually used said weapons of mass destruction- disregarding UN resolutions- threatening several sovereign nations with unprovoked attack- blaming all or most internal instances of public violence on foreign agents- labeling all enemies of the state with a title that strikes fear into the population (e.g. "terrorist")Looks like the USA gets a 10 out of 10! Congratulations to our new membersMore like 8/10, I would disagree with faked election and disregarding UN resoultions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahdi Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Give it another month, then it'll be disregarding UN resolutions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Blame it on bin Laden, he started it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inoculator9 Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 I agree, Iraq is just a distraction from Osama :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Basically, it's like this:bin Laden gets idea.Idea=kill as much west people as possible.Idea=reality.Bush=angry on Laden.Bush announces "War on Terrorism".Bush gets reason to attack countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inoculator9 Posted January 24, 2003 Author Share Posted January 24, 2003 I think Bush started the Iraq krap up again to distract us from the fact that he was doing a terrible job catching Bin Laden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terror Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 mwah i truly wouldn't know. Perhaps they do, perhaps they don't. same goes for the war, i'm not for nor against. I do not like what saddam has done to his people for decades, and IMO he should be removed, however i do not know what the consequences of this war will be Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 Well, he wouldn't if it wasn't for Laden... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemafakei Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 The US has broken UN-approved treaties with N Korea. (Which, coincidentally, the same treaty which prohibited the N Koreans from getting nukes)The elections, while not rigged, are hardly more than a choice of managemenst for a basically non-interfering government. The real power lies in the hands of those with money. But that's another story...It seems that...The UN resolution is being interpreted by Bush as 'Iraq must prove its complete innocence, or it is liable to be bombed'.The UN resolution is being interpreted by Blix as 'Iraq must help us find out what's going on, else I won't stop Bush'.The UN resolution is being interpreted by Blix as 'We'll wait until either Bush blows his top, or Blix finds something big'.The UN resolution is being interpreted by Chirac as 'Bush must prove Iraq's guilt, else they shouldn't fight. And we won't help them'.The UN resolution is being interpreted by Chirac as 'Bush must prove Iraq's guilt, else they probably shouldn't fight. And we might help them. Um. I didn't mean that...'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emprworm Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 The Axis of Evil is now hiring! Does YOUR country meet the requirements to become part of our exclusive club?- a corrupt and power hungry leaderfalse- ineffective and/or faked election system partially true, but it is redeemable.- a highly manipulative media lol! what are you smoking? totally false.- displaying expansionist tendencies false- posessing weapons of mass destruction true- having actually used said weapons of mass destruction true, but misleading. The US does not threaten nuclear war for conventional war. The corrected criteria should be stated as: Threatens nuclear war for conventional war, or dictator states posessing nuclear weapons - disregarding UN resolutions True. - threatening several sovereign nations with unprovoked attackfalse- blaming all or most internal instances of public violence on foreign agents lol! And you were smoking what? 9/11 was the fault of foreign agents, but the overwhelming majority of violence in our country is internal.- labeling all enemies of the state with a title that strikes fear into the population (e.g. "terrorist")True. The only enemies the US has declared are terrorists. Do you know one that is not?Looks like the USA gets a 10 out of 10! Congratulations to our new members!false Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edric O Posted January 24, 2003 Share Posted January 24, 2003 LOL, even with all your objections, you still get 5 out of 10!But, anyway, the whole thing was only meant as a joke! If you noticed, most points are subjective. (namely the ones you disagreed with - their subjectivity means you can get away with it ;) ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.