Iraq Debate
Add Comments?
TESTING NEW HOME!
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Dayton, Oh USA - Wednesday, November 17, 1999 at 02:54:09 (EST)
Yes I guess it is true! Iraq is about a GONE topic these days. People are now interested in who Bubba is banging. I have a feeling though that Iraq is only simmering on the back burner. Nutcases like that don't just go away ya know... Meanwhile... I really would not have cared about Clinton sleeping with who ever he wanted. The thing is he lied about it. His personal life has nothing to do with running the country. I liked him first off when I heard he had smoked pot and partially admitted to it. You can smoke pot and be president but you can't smoke pot and get a decent job hehehe.. Funny aint it?
Leda
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, Oh USA - Monday, April 20, 1998 at 18:54:13 (MST)
I would guess that no one cares about IRAQ anymore - seems interest in the situation has been over shadowed by people trying to determine who the president can have "intimate relations with" and what you can put into your body (cigarettes).... Typical
Billy <WSPFARRERJR@MSN.COM>
DAYTON, OH USA - Sunday, April 19, 1998 at 17:09:00 (MST)
In history, many different countries have tried to play the role of peace provider (from France during the American revolution to England during the American civel war [look it up !!] and th US since about 1880) everytime, we or any other country get invlved in a dispute, they lose. From the Faulklands to our "Bay of Pigs" (although each of hem was a "limited" war. If we are to "crush" Sadam and the Republican Guard - just F&^$%(*$% do it rather than Clintonize it (in other words talk until public opinion "mandates it").. America cannot defend others while people are dying in its own streets.....not morally
BILLY <wspafarrer@msn.com>
DAYTON, ON USA - Sunday, April 12, 1998 at 22:29:47 (MST)
I hate Saddam as much as the next person, but he has not done anything the United States has not done in the past. During the Civil War the U.S. Army used human shields on trains and round forts. Genoside........talk to the Indains. We have invaded many countries for our own gain. There has never been a great times of peace in that region of the world. If old George hadn't geeked when he saw the pictures of the "Highway to hell" and stopped us we would have taken over Iraq.......but then what, do we want to run Iraq. Bush was able to save his son's oil..........what you did not know that the President's son (Bush) had more Kuwait oil than anyone else in the U.S. (sad but true). Yes Saddam is bad, but there are more like him, that we never hear about. As Robert Heinlein said "Time wounds all heals" and there is a special place in hell for Saddam.
Capt. Pegleg <krehmertx2@aol.com>
Manassas, VA USA - Wednesday, April 01, 1998 at 11:17:26 (MST)
Ok, ok. I was a sniper in the US army, infantry. I held a high clearance. I know something of the weapons in question. So. Has the whole world lost its mind? There is one thought that I have not heard mentioned...We so easily assume that we are sane, that we know what is right, that we know what is REAL...Allow me to point to one simple thought - The weapons we accuse Iraq of POSSIBLY being able to manufacture (at some future time...maybe) WE ALREADY HAVE BY THE TON. So, uhm, er, what if all humans are just people doing the best they have with what they've got? The US is not the chosen people of the world. There are no chosen people of the world. There are just people. You've been sold lies for so long that you don't think for yourself, and by the way, that is just what the intelligence community is banking on. You're making their lives sweet and profitable.
And Leda, honey, you're a doll. Big kiss.
kasper <kasper@dimensional.com>
USA - Saturday, March 28, 1998 at 04:36:54 (MST)
Documented facts:
1. Minimum number of the 10 biological materials suspected in Iraqi warfare research that were supplied by U.S. firms:9.
2.Number of biological materials with military potential sent to Iraq by the U.S. CDC in the 1980's:14.
3.Ratio of Iraqi chemical-warfare agents destroyed in the Gulf War to those since destroyed under U.N> pressure: 2:5.
4.Estimated ratio of veterans reporting Gulf War syndrome symptoms to total U.S. Vietnam War combat deaths: 4:1.
This means:
1.US created the Saddam Bio threat.
2.US created the Saddam Bio threat.
3.Military methods are ineffective; less than half as effective as less dramatic UN methods in defusing threats.
4.US created suffering among great numbers of its own.
Sources referenced p.76, Harper's magazine, April 1988 issue.
Zot Szurgot <zot@gnv.fdt.net>
Gainesville, FL EEUU - Friday, March 20, 1998 at 07:54:40 (MST)
As a nation, we need to be consistent. We decide. If we are opposed to oppression, oppose it all. This includes US-sponsored Indonesian genocide of the civilian population of East Timor, US-backed death squad dictatorships in Latin America and their School of the Amerikas terrorist training camp here inside our borders, US-business-and-banks-required austerity measures for foreign economies that force leaders to implement policies that interfere with citizens' abilities to grow crops for local markets (resulting in starvation), US-funded corruption in Africa, and the racist implementation of the death penalty here.
Consistent. If we are opposed to terrorism, oppose it all. US sold Saddam&Co most of the weapons he used in the last two wars, and US continues today to arm dictators and terrorists, some of whom are known to resell to Saddam. US covert operations blur the lines, involving US citizens in terrorist causes in China, El Salvador, Nigeria, Indonesia, Myanmar/Burma, Chiapas, Antgola, Colombia, Turkey, Iran, the Phillipines, and Chile (these are some we know about). US overt (open, documented, publicized) operations regularly slaughter, violate the sovereignty of neighbors, break international law, violate treaties the US has sworn to uphold, and ignore election laws.
Consistent. Permit inspections of all facilities suspected of producing weapons of mass destruction, no matter what country they are in, including US and allies, or permit none. Retaliate equally against all governments which cross borders illegally, including England, Israel, China, lndonesia, Mexico, and the US.
Consistent. Define the laws, treaties, and UN resolutions we are willing to stand by, and refer to them when punishing transgressors. Punish equally and follow the rules ourselves. Punish corporations equally with the nations they are now bigger than. The rule of law is civilized; the rule of retaliating bullies, like mere name-calling, is child's play we should have grown out of. If we decide as a nation that certain behavior is unacceptable (and we must do so), then it is unacceptable for all, punished equally, and referred to as specific violations.
I think we should do what we together decide to do. If we decide to bomb the hell out of leaders who enslave their citizens and slaughter their neighbors, then let's start with our favored trade partner China's brutal leaders, then our pal Suharto and his Indonesian thugs, and so on, in order of atrocity level. I guarantee you we will be busy with several countries before we even get to Saddam. If we decide together to bomb the hell out of oppressed civilian populations and their infrastructure (but leave the despots alive to rally the resulting anger into new support for themselves), let's get going. We can start with the construction workers, unemployed, and single mothers of this nation. If we decide to put our grandchildren into debt to insure our favorite multinational oil firms get the best access to oil, let's at least admit it and demand that the firms repay the debt in full. If we decide to look past the gloss presented by news owned by a few multinational corporations to a deeper understanding of international strategies, let's get looking.
For the sake of our own integrity, whatever we do, let's at least be consistent.
Zot Szurgot <zot@gnv.fdt.net>
FL USA - Monday, March 09, 1998 at 09:12:15 (MST)
Identify, isolate, and eliminate.
Identity where he is at, (or going to be), isolate the location, (by cutting off
road links, communication, etc. ) and eliminate him, by dropping the biggest
bloodly bomb (non-nuclear) in the inventory, on him. Let the chips fall where
they may. I have a son in the First Marine Division, and I don't want him to
fight in the Gulf again.
redmax <mshewmake@PRODIGY.com>
albuquerque, nm USA - Saturday, March 07, 1998 at 23:22:58 (MST)
Seems Ole' SoDamn'd Insane threw a wrench in the works again.. Prolonging the inevitable. Now we all know he is going to do the same thing and we are going to be back to square one!
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, OH USA - Friday, March 06, 1998 at 11:25:36 (MST)
two words: carpet bombing
big andy <kburikhan>
USA - Wednesday, March 04, 1998 at 22:15:07 (MST)
Since I served in the Marines during the Viet Nam era,in the late 60's I have to be quite honest and straight forward. I think our government backs down on to many situations regarding the Middle East. I say level the country and all the Fucking people in it. But first we should make sure Sadam is right in the middle. I don't care what anybody say's about those people over there. They are filty low life's. It's time to set an example. Nuke em.
Bob T <mystic@starnetinc.com>
Inverness, Il. USA - Tuesday, March 03, 1998 at 15:59:06 (MST)
It's simple, I dont know why no one has done it yet. $1,000,000 to the person or people who kill sadam!
how long do you think he'll live?
jerseyguy
USA - Tuesday, March 03, 1998 at 15:40:18 (MST)
Ok...time to get political. If we DO bomb the hell out of Iraq...we have the problem of a POSSIBLE ww3 on our hands. Then it might turn out to be another Vietnam. The draft will be reinstated and then all hell will break loose.BUT on the other hand if we NUKE the F'er...then we would be able to rid alot of rats in the world. But you must also consider the innocent (a factor that was over looked with Hiroshima;with The Fat Man and Little Boy) And of course our technoligy has improved since then (our smart bombs are efective) SO l suppose my vote would be: Bomb only the necessary parties that needed to be eradicated!!!!
R <MDewFreak2@aol>
Detroit, Mi USA - Saturday, February 28, 1998 at 19:34:29 (MST)
BOMB THE CRAZY BASTARD NOW.
(like we should have done the first time)
Ricky <pontiac'cableinet.co.uk>
Birmingham, UK - Friday, February 27, 1998 at 04:28:52 (MST)
BOMB THE CRAZY BASTARD NOW.
(like we should have done the first time)
Ricky <pontiac'cableinet.co.uk>
Birmingham, UK - Friday, February 27, 1998 at 04:27:38 (MST)
This thing still work? Poke Poke...
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, OH USA - Wednesday, February 25, 1998 at 23:32:16 (MST)
ROFLMAO
You guys crack me up!
Leda <leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, OH USA - Tuesday, February 24, 1998 at 21:40:42 (MST)
I think wiser heads should prevail. We should follow the sound advice of leaders. Men like Rover!!! His was the best opinion yet!
Jester <jstr@iname.com>
Memphis, Tn USA - Tuesday, February 24, 1998 at 11:15:45 (MST)
Testing CHMOD attributes lalalaa
Leda <leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, OH USA - Tuesday, February 24, 1998 at 11:12:22 (MST)
giggle... now now Rover... BEHAVE or it's the Dog house for you! I need to catch up on the whole thing and watch some CNN. I've been kinda busy lately and have not had time. What's the latest? Leda...
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, OH USA - Tuesday, February 24, 1998 at 09:16:21 (MST)
Leda, Leda, Leda,
How can I be thinking about kicking his butt when all I want to think about is licking yours?
NOT a hard decision for me to make.
xoxoxo
rover
rover <rover@flash.net>
North Whittier, CA USA - Monday, February 23, 1998 at 22:21:31 (MST)
I still say we kick his ass. I for one am tired of the whining. I am tired of turning on the television and seeing these "poor innocent souls" who are so damn insane"s "prisoners" as they go about their daily routine. BURNING OUR FLAG and TELLING THE WORLD HOW THEY WILL FIGHT US, and MARCHING IN MILITARY TYPE FORMATIONS. ( formations that Israel and his people probably think are similar to the nazi bastards that plunged the world into chaos in the 30's )
How can we expect our government to "play hard-ball'' with Suddam, when they can't even commit to punishing our nations own pschopaths and killers ??? ( with exception to the state of Texas !!!! )
If the people of Iraq are truly prisoners, they have three basic choices:accept, fight, or flee . Myself, I would fight ! Just as the Germans did. I would like to thank "Israel" for pointing out the similarities of Hitler and Hussein to me, it is a good comparison!!! Yes, lives will be lost on all sides. Will it be more lives than if we wait for him to attack ??? Anybody on this net that thinks So Damn Insane cannot "reach" America is either a fool, or to young to be on this page, and should ask their parents to explain. The possible methods of deployment are myriad in number, and much easier than most would care to believe. Suppose that anthrax that was in the trunk the other day had been REAL, and further suppose that a "suicide bomber" mentality were present and "the vial were opened... ); gee wouldn't we feel silly? ................ No !!! We would feel pain and death. I must admit that I would rather see those supporting that asshole suffer that death, than citizens of countries like ours. This arguement is mute though as we mere citizens don't make those decisions. I just want one shot at him !!! Screw the arguements. Even if I died as a result of that shot, it would not be "in the line of duty" but as a pleasure.
In other words: let's kick his ass !!!
Jester <jstr@iname.com>
Memphis, TN USA - Monday, February 23, 1998 at 13:16:37 (MST)
If you're wondering why the politicians are riding the rails on this, just read further at the letters in this page. We need to all send our reps a heartfelt KICK SADDAM'S ASS OFF THE PLANET This message on behalf of the "Cow's of Iowa against Death (a non profit orginization)
Jester <jstr@iname.com>
USA - Monday, February 23, 1998 at 12:43:39 (MST)
I think it's good that we can laugh during this time. I know we all care about what happens, but no matter what we think, we can't really DO anything about it. Humor is necessary to release this stress.
Ok, someone on a NG made the point that Saddam doesn't need missiles to get biological weapons into the US. They can be smuggled in in a suitcase for example, so we have to eliminate his biological weapons capability completely. Makes sense, except for the fact that you can whip uo a respectable amount of anthrax using a couple of dead cows and a bathtub. So, we have to make sure we destroy all the cows and bathtubs in Iraq. However, you could use a couple dead chickens and a bucket to isolate and concentrate the Anthrax organism as well. Now, I would think it would be kind of tough to design and build all those tiny bombs with which to take out those Chickens of Mass Destruction. So really, it seems like the most practical thing to do is just kill Saddam.
Paul <s_kenner@hotmail.com>
USA - Monday, February 23, 1998 at 12:18:31 (MST)
Did you read the paper this morning. More politicing bullshit. Saddam and the
UN came to another agreement. This doesn't surprise me one damn bit. This delay
has given that SOB another opportunity to move all his "weapons of mass destruction"
to another site where, when the UN gets to it, we'll be right back in the same spot.
This is the solution to end all solutions. Given we have the balls to carry it out.
The next time the UN runs into a "Saddam roadblock" and he doesn't allow anyone to
inspect a site, we should give them two hours to open the door and let them in or
send in a couple of F-15's with those new "bunker-bombs" and level the area. Then
it's off to inspect another site. How many times do you think it will take Saddam
to fuck with us then?
dave zorko <mr_zorko@hotmail.com>
Jacksonville, FL USA - Monday, February 23, 1998 at 07:09:15 (MST)
I know this is not a laughing matter but, when I read your comment about one landing in some Iowa cornfield I laughed till my ribs hurt! Just the way you came across it was hysterical. Dan's eyes are still watering and so are mine. And yes, I bet the US would take him out real quick if that happened. They say War helps the economy, maybe this is the reason who knows! One thing is for sure. He has the "weapons of Mass destruction" and the chemicals which he can potentially get into this country. I don't see the big deal. Send in a commando team and take him out. We don't need a war for doing that. There has to be some other reason the GOV has to do this.
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, OH USA - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 23:52:04 (MST)
FYI, here's a clear, concise link that tells about anthrax.
http://mano.icsd.hawaii.gov/health/cdd/cddanthr.htm
Paul <ya_right@yahoo.com>
USA - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 22:16:43 (MST)
Leda wrote:
"Still forgetting the bottom line here.... Either way it goes. He needs to be stopped now!!! Think about it... HE IS THE TYPE TO COME AFTER US!"
Not to be argumentative, but how did you arrive at that conclusion? He doesn't have a missile that can go more than about 90 miles, and with the sanctions, he has no means to develop them. He poses no threat to us. In addition, can you imagine what the US response would be if he managed to land even one lousy dud in some Iowa cornfield? The US military would wipe out Iraq in a day. And believe me, Saddam is well aware of that. He may be an A**HOLE, but he wouldn't be alive today if he was stupid.
Leda wrote: "Don't we have some super satelite that can laser him out or something?" Probably. You really think our government wants to get rid of Saddam? You really think it would be all that hard for the CIA or the NSA to take out Saddam and make it look like an accident/natural causes/the Russians did it, etc.? Don't forget, the technology the CIA has at its disposal is 20 years ahead of anything the public sees. We could have taken Saddam out in 1991. We probably could have taken him out at any time since then. But we haven't. Why? Why haven't we gotten rid of this one evil man who has been spitting in our face for 7 years? I don't know, but I have a feeling that if I ask the CIA, I'm not going to get an answer.
Leda Wrote: "I still say you'd change your mind if faced with a couple Anthrax bombs in your neighborhood."
Perhaps then, you can explain to me why Saddam's neighbors aren't even willing to let us use their airstrips to land and refuel if we should start bombing? Remember, they gave us lots of help last time. This time, they are opposed and refusing to cooperate. Now, since they are close enough to Iraq for supposed weapons of mass destruction to reach them, don't you think they'd WANT our protection? They're not only refusing to accept it, they're refusing to help us and risking pissing off the most powerful economic and military entity in the world. Tell me, why aren't THEY worried about Saddam's anthrax bombs? Why are they so opposed to our "protection" that they are refusing to allow us access to their airstrips, and in some cases, their airspace so we can't even fly over their country in an attempt to bomb Iraq? I can't tell you why. The reason I can't tell you why is because none of those opposed countries has had any representative interviewed by CNN or other British or American news agencies so as to have a chance to explain their unwillingness to accept our helping hand. I would like to know why that is. In fact, there are some pretty hard questions here that remain unanswered. The whole thing is way, way wrong and the story I'm getting from the news makes no sense.
Paul <don't_write@to_me.com>
USA - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 22:11:24 (MST)
The United States has come under a great deal of fire from other nations over this issue. I'd like to point out that by not allowing UN weapons inspectors access to certain facilities, Saddam is implying that they might find something. After all, what motive could he have to allow access to some sites and not to others? If I were the leader of a country in Iraq's position, I would either allow access to all sites or to none...not only select sites. I believe that Saddam does indeed pose a threat to peace and that he needs to be stopped. The United States has been accused of trying to be the world's police. Well, it's a tough job, and I say that if they want it, let them have it because it's no picnic. So why don't we all get off their backs and show a little support for a job that needs doing? Just my $0.02. Good night all.
Anshar <anshar@sympatico.ca>
Niagara Falls, ON Canada - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 20:54:07 (MST)
Still forgetting the bottom line here.... Either way it goes. He needs to be stopped now!!! Think about it... HE IS THE TYPE TO COME AFTER US! You all are right in the sense. "It is not right to bomb Iraq" unless the objective is aimed at him alone. Don't we have some super satelite that can laser him out or something? You would think getting him alone would be the main thing here. I still say you'd change your mind if faced with a couple Anthrax bombs in your neighborhood. KICK HIS BUTT!!! Sincerely, Leda...
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, OH USA - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 17:30:28 (MST)
That should read ". . .unharmed and in power"
Sheesh
USA - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 15:49:50 (MST)
PLEASE WAKE UP!!!
This proposed massacre is not about Saddam. He will survive unarmed and in power. Bombing Iraq
is akin to bombing NYC to get rid of John Gotti.
The US has already caused the deaths of over 1.5 million Iraquis and is just pathetic to read
all the insanity of those who are still deluded enough to believe that this is
really about making the world a safer place for all people.
Sheesh
USA - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 15:48:35 (MST)
Sorry, one final point. Last war, Saddam dropped 39 scuds on Israel, who did not retaliate for fear of starting a world war. This time, Israel has made it clear that they will retaliate if Saddam bombs them. If that happens, Saddam will gain intstant allies in some other nations in the area, because of anti-Israeli sentiment. That would make things difficult for us, since we are fighting from a distance and they have the home-field advantage, so to speak. In addition, once Israel gets involved, it becomes a religious war as well as a political one. It could well escalate to a world war three.
I'm not saying we should cower in our corner of the world, afraid to defend our interests, though! I'm just saying, be aware of what the stakes are before you make the bet.
Paul again <sir_blabalot@mouthy.com>
USA - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 11:07:20 (MST)
Sorry to be so long-winded, but here is another thought. Most people would agree that the only justification for killing another person is either in self-defense or in defending someone who cannot defend theirself. If we bomb Iraq, it wouldn't be self-defense because he doesn't have any way to strike the USA. If we are defending others, shouldn't we like, wait until they ASK us for help? As far as I know, none of Saddam's neighbors support airstrikes.
Paul <neverming@eatme.com>
USA - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 10:58:36 (MST)
No doubt, pretty much everyone agrees that Saddam is evil and needs to be removed. However, bombing Iraq is only going to kill the Iraqi people, mostly civillians, who are really Saddam's victims. The Iraqi people can't remove him from power because he has guns, tanks and bombs, and they don't. The only news Iraqi's get is what Saddam tells them, and with martial law in effect, he can kill anyone who criticizes him. The Iraqi people are not responsible for Saddam's actions; they are in effect his prisoners, and they may not even know it.
In the last war, we succeeded in killing tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civillians. Our military did its best to target only military objectives, but war is at best an extremely sloppy business, hence all those friendly-fire deaths. Aside from killing all those men, women and children, we got Saddam out of Kuwait. However, we did not remove him from power, take away his military, or remove his weapons manufacturing capability. This was a mistake on our part. Since then, we have tried to make up for that mistake by imposing sanctions on Iraq. The sanctions don't hurt Saddam. He is building palaces while over half a million people (some estimates put that figure at over a million) have starved to death.
So far, the USA has done nothing to Saddam except eject him from Kuwait. We have tried bombing and we have tried sanctions and we have tried negotiations. Now we are on the verge of bombing them again, in the hopes that killing more Iraqi citizens will convince Saddam to let us look to see if he might be developing weapons that he could use in the future. That doesn't make sense; Saddam has already proven that he doesn't care about Iraqu citizens.
I don't think all the killing is justified. If we were to take out Saddam, that would be justified. But showering Iraq with bombs isn't going to do that. Saddam will just hide again. If we could send one lone bomb that would take out Saddam, I would be all for it. However, I cannot support any other type of attack in which innocent people will die.
Paul <not_interested@bugoff.com>
USA - Sunday, February 22, 1998 at 10:51:13 (MST)
kick the snot out of hussain and send a bunker buster down his evil throat....thank you for your moments in time... doug
doug <neohuman@aol.com>
USA - Saturday, February 21, 1998 at 11:43:57 (MST)
WELL PUT Israel!!! Notice Tvslit did not put where he was from either... Hmmmmm
Leda <leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, OH USA - Friday, February 20, 1998 at 10:04:20 (MST)
Excuse me TVSLIT, but are you that heartless, or just historically challenged ?? Renenber 60 years ago when thinking like yours prevented the U.S. from going after an Austrian sociopath named Adolph ?? For years the skies of western europe were filled with smoke from the stacks of the "death camps", but nobody cared to stop him at first. Only when he and his axis cohorts waged assaults on the U.K., U.S. and european "allies" did anyone think that Hitler might be dangerous. I submit that it might not be in our best interests to wait this time. I know my people will not watch it happen again. Will they ??
Israel <not2sure@iname.com>
USA - Friday, February 20, 1998 at 09:58:05 (MST)
The lessons of Vietnam are being invoked by ALL sides to prove their point. The most important one to me is that a lot of good men died over there for what seems to have been a wasted effort. My dad among them. It seems to me common sense dictates that if we go,we must go as a united force, dedicated to the job at hand. The homefront supporting our guys in every way we can. TOTAL commitment !!!! like Caesar, go, vanquish, and return quickly. We don't need another generation of kids losing their parents, and not understanding why ! We have a situation of a madman, armed to the teeth and unstable as hell, with an intolerable hatred of the USA. This is no time for the squeamish !!! Will we wait until we are faced by Anthrax, or the Bubonic plague in the American mid-west ??? Then who shall we blame ??? The psychotic dictator ? or the "blind" humanitarians that let him live? All I know is that if I had the "BUTTON", it would be imbedded in the desk.
Jester <jstr@iname.com>
Louisville , KY USA - Friday, February 20, 1998 at 09:43:27 (MST)
In regards to Tvslits comment... I don't mean to sound like a bitch. If we stay home, soon we would not have a home, or at least not one worth living in. If it came down to launching Nukes on someone or living under a dictatorship such as under Saddam. I would nuke um! I think we had little choice to do it in the past. War is not good in any sense. We are not forcing OUR "U.S. of A." ways on anyone by running over their country. But, if force and Nukes are needed to keep their Butts out. So be it! I would not wanna live like that! You seem to have little respect for this place that so many die to protect. Leda
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Trotwood, OH USA - Friday, February 20, 1998 at 06:18:55 (MST)
This is a test of the Emergency broadcast system... if this had been an actualy test you would have been informed to bend over and kiss you ass good bye!hehehe Ummm, actually just trying the CGI on the New server... Leda
Leda Server Test <Leda@ledamay.com>
Dayton, OH USA - Friday, February 20, 1998 at 05:22:04 (MST)
Let me first start by saying this. I was there before. I know how it was. I was a member of the armored divison of the 1st. Cav. I was 18 years old then, fresh out of training. I was a gunner on board an M1A1 Abrams. (tank). We were the first ones over the bordrer. The Iraqui Miltitary is a cowardly organization. However, the civillian partisan groups there will give you more trouble than the military ever will, even their hailed Republican Guard. Dont get me wrong, Im all for military action against these cowardly mice who burn the very flag I risked my life to defend, the same flag my father died defending 30 years ago in a cespool of a nation called Vietnam. But what do you propose to do? Bomb them from the air? That didnt work 30 years ago in Vietnam. Occupy the country and have 10 years of bloody guerilla warfare, resulting in thousands of American casualties? Release weapons of mass destruction on them and set off a chain of events that will bring the world to its demise? There is no viable solution. It still amazes me how a country roughly the size of the state of Alabama can turn the world inside out. Lets all hope for a political solution....If that doesnt work, God help our soilders, myself included, I wont sit idly here in my comfortable home while someone else defends this country I love so much. I will die defending her,if I have to, just like my father did 30 years ago..
Alicia Alexandria <CDAlicia@aol.com>
Roanoke, Va USA - Thursday, February 19, 1998 at 18:45:59 (MST)
Hm ... I was told this bad guy probably has bad weapons and he might have used or not or will use them . Well , I dont know whether this is true , but the US of A have the biggest arsenal of these and they did use them on innocent people , if I remember Hiroshima or Dresden or Nagasaki correctly .There is absolutely no reason for this child's play other than the traditional american righteousness .Stay home !Best greetings .
TV slit <TV slit@aol.com>
on holiday, -
First off, Samy... I appreaciate your participation and comments but, please don't post the same MSG 8times again. I know you are trying to make a point but, one time is all it takes.As for your comment... The NUT has used them and proof shows he will again. Get a grip.. the guy is insane and threatens to randomly bomb innocent people again and again...Just like I said at the opening of this page... "I am sure those opposed would have a different opinion if he was lobbing bombs on us instead of someone else". Analogy; If you were walking down the street and saw somebody being mugged, raped, or beaten and you had a gun and the ability to stop it, would you? Bet your ass I would! Kick SoDamn Insane's BUTT is my vote!Leda, the Militant Bitch...
Leda <leda@ledamay.com>
Dayton, OH USA -
For Leda's last comment: I think that it is now a fact that Sadam did not use the chemical weapons against any country even during the Gulf war.If he was that crazy he would have used them long time ago. Countries that make neuclear and chemical weapons do so to be able to use them one day if needed and not just for stocking them for pleasure.I repeat that I am against Sadam, but I hate to see cevilians die because of the expected bombing.What is happeneing is not for oil, USA gets oil fro other places. It is not for Kuwait, It is for protecting others, do you know by now or not ?!.
Samy <prince_3@hotmail.com>
Cairo, EGYPT -
I did get the feeling that the US was trying to "Sell" us this war when they showed the picture of the woman and child dead from Saddam. It seemed to be planned to get people to back what the gov is wanting to do and I must say it backfired! People are still asking to many good questions about this whole thing and it showed that not all are fully supportive. Not that all ever agree on everything, I'm just saying... it looked bad for us having so many people that are opposed on International TV like that. The BOTTOM LINE IS "This guy has done it before UNLIKE others and there is a BIG threat he will do it again". We haftah do something about it! I also, do believe that the government hasother reasons for singling out Iraq and that's Oil. It is too bad that when we do whip Iraq's butt that the money from Saddam's oil will be split up and only small portions will probably actually make it to helping the people of Iraq. Hell, I bet we actually have other power sources that would eliminate oil all together and the GOV does not introduce them because of wellll... Money!
And to Samy's comment below. A weapon is not a weapon until it is used. Being in power and having power is one thing, but to use it as Saddam plans to "and has over and over" is another. As far as the other countries and wars they have going. Those are soldiers fighting and they knew what they knew what they are getting into int he first place. It is the ruthless and inhumane killing of innocent people with bombs that gets me going. Just imagine the mind of a person that could lob a chemical bomb into a city. Sigh.. tht is horrific, to Leda...
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Dayton, OH USA -
I agree with the concept of the strong defending the week. King Arthur was said to say the same. Part of the problem, I think, is the mixed message of USA's foreign policy. Giving ultimatums really only works when the foe believes he might be in danger. When we issue deadlines in an "or else" format, we must be committed to following through. Most of europe does not believe in the USA's dedication,or motivation, for that matter. (Thank the policies of the "wannabe ambassador" Jimmy Carter, when he was taking up space in the Whitehouse) We live in the greatest country ever, the closest thing this world has to Camelot. We must remain proud. We must remain dedicated. We must remain strong. We must kick Saddam's ass !!!!! This country needs more people of sense AND compassion, like Leda.
Jester <jstr@iname.com>
Nashville, tn USA -
Oil Has a big part to do with it I am sure... I don't think bombing Iraq is a good idea but, it is better than the alternative of sending troops in to die to physically remove him. If we do bomb, do it right and get everything! And maybe we'll get lucky and take the NUT out in the process. He is someone that has used these weapons "OF MASS DESTRUCTION" (sheesh, just say big bombs) over and over "Unlike" the other dictators. I know the USA is not always right but, we ARE in a position to do something about a lot of the inhumane things that go on and I believe whole-heartedly that we should help everyone that is threatened by people like Sodamned Insane!
Leda <leda@ledamay.com>
Dayton, OH USA -
I am againest Sadam in what he is doing. In the mean time I do not aggree to bomb Iraq.Let me tell yoy this: The serbs were killing Bosnians and the Russians were killing Shishany people, Israel is killing palastenians and destroying there houses and Israel has 300 neuclear bombs to destroy its neighbour countries, but USA was not that interrested in defending.!!!Why are they interrested in the case of Sadam? I know you are not aware.
Samy <prince_3@hotmail.com>
Cairo, EGYPT -
After watching the debate, I was all riled up. I can't believe those idiots that were screaming in the background on International TV. Anyway, I would definately not want to hurt civilians but, if they are "STUuuuuPiiid" enough to go inside of a place about to be bombed then they were not running on a full bank of SIMM in the first place, I mean "C'mon"... People over there really have a totally diferent outlook on things that *IS* scary. And it truly is not right for us to judge their beliefs or ways. However; It is our right to disagree with them. Just, let them do their thing and we can do ours. Now as soon as they rape and invade other countries... We should kick their butt because there has to be a line drawn somewhere! IMO Ledapants...
Leda <Leda@ledamay.com>
Dayton, OH USA -
we should list every site he has denied us access to and bomb it to the depth of 1000 ft. maybe we'll get lucky and hit saddam this time and not have to go back and spend another $10 billion in a year or so after he makes his pussy-ass , lying plea to stop and he'll be a good boy this time. he's proven time and again that he lies more than slick-willy does, and unlike clinton, he doesn't care if any one knows that he's pulling the sheets over our heads. let's just make sure we're ready to bomb the hell out of any of his "buddies" who hate him just a little less than they fear his maniacal "logic" when they decide that by killing him, we've made their world a little less safe, when we probably just enabled them to continue the pathetic existence that they themselves have allowed saddam to shovel on them by worshipping him into power in the first place, thereby endangering their own lives and those of every one else on the entire planet. as dennis miller would say "that's just my opinion, i might be sane"
brian <gotsex@webtv.net >
seattle, wa USA -
SoDamn Insane never seems to learn. I think the world community is sick of his little reign of terror in the Mid East and I know I am.There was business left unfinished because it was all too easy when last we confronted this tyrant, and that business was erasing the world of Sadaam.I hate unfinished business and this time the strike should be quick, harsh, and continue until that little blemish on Earths face is terminated.Hmmmm.....and I usually keep my opinions to myself.Ragtop
Ragtop <ragtop@ragtop.com>
USA -
Kick his ass! At any cost... just do it and get it over with. Not that I am ruthless and would want to hurt anyone but, there are exceptions and this guy is a Nutball! And Terrorism is another thing I have no patience with. If my plane was taken over by terrorists when I was on it. Blow me up along with the terrorist! This would at least eliminate them from doing it again. If, it were not an option to bargain... they would not do it in the first place. Sincerely, Leda!
Leda <leda@ledamay.com>
Dayton, OH USA -