Colin Powell speech

[AlphaWolf]

I am curious to know what the general consensus in germany/france is besides what their respective national governments think on this.

I myself was thinking that we were a bit pre-emptive towards iraq for a while, but powell has some pretty solid proof. All I have to say is that either history can repeat itself, or we can prevent it from repeating. 3 words: japan, pearl harbor. We knew pretty well what they were doing prior to the strike, just as we know pretty well what iraq is doing now.

 

[vampireuk]

I saw no conclusive proof, a few grainy pictures. Oh and the tape recordings but under American law arnt tape recordings inadmisable as evidence?

 

[Trotterwatch]

Well most of the stuff was nothing new, it was just shown in a more media friendly manner. However, the evidence that was shown was enough. Saddam definately has stuff he shouldn't put it that way.

Would be good if an uprising in his own country could get rid of him though rather than relying on a War where undoubtedly innocents will suffer (though they suffer anyways with Saddam gassing them to test weapons etc).

One BIG thing is, regardless of how you get rid of Saddam the US, the UK and hopefully the rest of the UN will help Iraq, and show the people that we aren't all complete and utter b*****s. In the past the US for example used certain factions for their own ends, and ended up getting bitten badly in the arse because after they've used them, they forget about them.

Iraq will need unconditional support after action.

Back on topic though, I respect Powell and believe that the majority of people also respect him - he isn't a Pawn in Dubya's game anyways.

 

[vampireuk]

I found this amusing

 

[mesman00]

i look at it what one, as politically incorrect as it may be, get in there, kick there asses, kill sadaam, take care of people of iraq

 

[Malcolm]

i look at it what one, as politically incorrect as it may be, get in there, kick there asses, kill sadaam, take care of people of iraq

The only problem with that is usually a new more ass-hole'ish person takes that leaders place, tells all the 'cool' people of that country that you're a big meany head, the people don't get that the new guy is just as bad or worse then the old guy and then they spit on your car... ON YOUR CAR GOD DAMMIT

As you can see this solution can be bad for many reasons, but none more important then the car

 

[2fast4u]

I myself was thinking that we were a bit pre-emptive towards iraq for a while, but powell has some pretty solid proof. All I have to say is that either history can repeat itself, or we can prevent it from repeating. 3 words: japan, pearl harbor. We knew pretty well what they were doing prior to the strike, just as we know pretty well what iraq is doing now.

ah, gotta love the ever present drawbacks to wwII .. why i always keep hearing those from americans when refering to new conflicts? anyway, that was just an editorial .. to get on topic the following:

basically powell didnt present anything new .. most of the stuff was either accusations from the kind we already know such as "we know theyve got weapons of mass destruction - just fucking believe us". then there were those tapes .. well .. in an american court, tapes are not admisable as evidence, as they are extremely easy to fake. on top of that, illegally obtained material is not admissable as evidence either. now in a question about war and peace we just overthrow all our democratic rules from our own courts cuz we aint applying this shit to americans, they are just arabs and besides we all know saddams a bastard. all in all, no sign of solid proof, that can put one in the position to determine if the shit bush and his gang are telling us is true or not.

you say we need to strike pre-emptively cuz saddams a threat? why now? why didnt u say so during the last 12 years? ah, and before that saddam seemed to be the best buddy of your government.

get in there, kick there asses, kill sadaam, take care of people of iraq

ahu? the us has proposed saddam to be exiled to prevent his country from being attacked. they dont care that saddam will be prosecuted for what he has done, they dont care to bring him to justice ... they just want him to be gone so we can have ourselves a little oil well opening and our people can drive 500 meters to the grocery store again. the sanctions have almost entirely hit the iraqi people and didnt even fucking touch saddam, yet they didnt take em back cuz theyd lose their precious face, eh? dont gimme this shit .. they dont give a flying fuck about the iraqi people.

summarization .. i wrote alot today and ull probably be giving me alot of pseudo noble shit again. there is no real proof, there is no real reason. all there to it, is greed.

kthx.

 

[Malcolm]

2fast4u.::. I agree with you, about 99% of the reason that the US is going after Iraq is because the Americans (Im talking about North and South America as a whole) are running out of oil. At present consumption we should run out of oil in about 6 years and, still at present consumption, the worlds oil supply will be gone in around 10 years.

Thats the reason for the new Hydrogen cars, that I believe Ford is producing, are out this year.

Anyways only 1% of the reason, IMHO, is because Saddam may attack other contries with the weapons that he does most likely have. My idea around it is that if we continue to have inspectors roaming around Iraq checking for weapons Saddam won't be able to launch a full scale attack against anyone because he won't have the space to launch that many weapons.

Just let the inspectors do their work, they'll eventually find something and bring it in; but common, going to war with Iraq isn't really going to solve anything, neither citizens of the contries want to fight.

My last point, think of the car, do you really want your nicely cleaned and waxed happy car to be spat on by someone?

Ofcourse not.

 

[mesman00]

My last point, think of the car, do you really want your nicely cleaned and waxed happy car to be spat on by someone?

Ofcourse not.

i never thought of it that way :happy:

 

[vampireuk]

Blair really should listen to the people who gave him his power, btw do you all know that the US is now buying oil from Iraq due to the strikes in venuezuela? Yup America is now relying on the country they are going to attack for the substance they are attacking for

*sniff sniff*

oooo irony!!:happy:

 

[Hacktarux]

I think as some of you does that Bush want to kick out Sadam to put someone else who will colaborate with US on oil business. But from what i've seen a few days ago on tv, they'll have BIG difficulties to find someone who's better... They are quite addicted to their guru... and someone else in this country should almost necessarily mean a muslin integrist. Note that i don't know why it has to be an integrist but expert said so and as i don't know who is able to replace Sadam i have to trust them... Well the point is that he may be worse than Sadam for world security...
Think about Afghanistan, taliban were put by americans years ago to put some oil pipeline to get oil from somewhere i don't remember.... and we all know how it has been finished.

And for the proofs, it really surprises me that they can't find more... It's hard to think that they can hide so much things when you know how US can spy for everybody.... And why did they wait so much time to show those proofs ?

And remember that people will resist, you'll have to kill them to put out Sadam. Take care of them ? lol

 

[Ryoga]

Proof? What is this proof that you keep asking for? You mean the proof required by UN Resolution 1441? It requires that Saddam provide PROOF that he destroyed all of his banned weapons. He supposedly did that with the weapons declaration that he submitted, which said he didn't have any. They have already found evidence that (again) Saddam lied. And yet you still believe him over the U.S.

BTW it hasnt been 12 years since the US did anything to him and it certenly hasn't been 12 years since he's shot at US and UK planes. Tell me if you think this is being best buddies.

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9609/03/iraq.clinton/

ps: If the US really wanted the oil, don't you think that they could go in and take it like Saddam did in Kuwait?

 

[sytaylor]

ps: If the US really wanted the oil, don't you think that they could go in and take it like Saddam did in Kuwait?

Imagine the world wide backlash if america just did that?! theyre not a lil rogue nation attacking another rogue that isnt very big on the internation scale as far as political influence goes.

Its a tough situation and to be honest, korea is the more pressing issue, and theyre only acting like a wounded animal because of the way bush is acting. I think they all just need to chill out a bit, every day is some other drama... if bush really wants america to go about its daily trade and keep the economy going why is he scaring the shit out of the economy by threating instability (war). This situation needs to end one way or another or we're gonna dip into a 30s like depression.

 

[2fast4u]

They have already found evidence that (again) Saddam lied. And yet you still believe him over the U.S.

where? all i see is govt officials making accussations w/o backing em up ... no sense in not showing proof if u have it ... :saint:

 

[2fast4u]

Look, in all honesty...Do you think the US would start this big of a lie just to get a little oil? I mean damn, there would be a lot more than the economy at stake if they did.

When it boils down to it, it is in fact our word vs theirs.

allow me to question the "little" part ... iraq has the world 2nd highest oil ressources and according to scientists, the present ammount thats being accessed atm can be almost trippled. not seeing that is ignorant.

it all comes down to self interest in the end ..

 

[2fast4u]

nope, the usa is still some sort of a democracy .. nonetheless, does that mean one cannot critizice you guys cuz you are so wonderful?

EDIT: im going to visit my bed now .. so if u excuse me, we can argue from 6:30 (gmt+1) in the morniing tomorrow again

 

[vampireuk]

At the moment they are as bad as each other, bush and saddam should be taken into the desert and shot. Then left in odd positions and have pictures taken so we can all laugh at them.:emutalk:

 

[sytaylor]

Lets face it if oil was all that bush wanted he could easily sign an underhand deal (at GOOD prices) with sadam, cos sadam would have money and security... america would have its oil... so its not about oil

its about :nuke:'s etc, which sadam does have, and is moving, we all know that, fair enough not as many as korea or syria.. but neither of these countries have ever been aggressive to countries around them as far as voilence is concerned. In that respect sadam is the loose canon... what is to be done about that is the more difficult question

 

[2fast4u]

Lets face it if oil was all that bush wanted he could easily sign an underhand deal (at GOOD prices) with sadam, cos sadam would have money and security... america would have its oil... so its not about oil

as stated above by yours truly...iraq isnt nearly accessing all its oil resources at this time, whereas the us economy seems to need it quite badly. so another iraq with a nice puppet govt (with the blessing of the usa) that would feel the strange urge to sell territory to american companies* so that they can get more of this good stuff for the benefit of the american industry would seem to be quite a tempting possibility for the bush administration.

* for examples how this works, read up on cuban, nicaraguan or chilenian history

also, may i point out to you that they have never officially denied the accussation that this whole shit is about oil?

which sadam does have

lend me that christal ball of yours sometime

but neither of these countries have ever been aggressive to countries around them as far as voilence is concerned.

oh they werent? i remember north korea repeatedly firing on south korean ships for instance. and by any chance do you remember the korean war? the difference between north korea and iraq is that north korea is protected by powers like china and attacking them would draw the usa into war even bigger than the one they are sliding into right now.

 

[sytaylor]

But you're forgetting saddam IS a puppet government put there by the americans! If they just appraoched him for oil saddam isnt stupid enough to say "no you were mean in the past :doh:"

and it doesn't take a christal ball just some sense, you know it and i know it... their weapons may not be advanced but theyre there

Theres a reason there is still a military presence at the border of north/south korea, simply because of their in-fighting past.. but on an international stage saddam has made the biggest waves and in that effect poses a threat, that has to be dealt with... ideally by exhile... the biggest winners would be the iraqi's themselves with over 60% needing food aid despite iraq being a massivley wealthy... and yet for someone who seems so humanitarian you really don't seem to like gettin rid of this guy huh?