No WMD's? Strike 1. No Saddam/Qaeda connection? Strike 2

[BeatenMan]

*Originally posted by Desmostylus *
**It’s pretty clear you don’t think it’s a good idea to cross the good ol’ U.S. of A.

It’s also not a good idea to cross the Mafia.

Nor is it a good idea to cross a drunken loon who walks into a bar with a shotgun.

The good ol’ U.S. of A. isn’t looking a hell of a lot different from the Mafia or the drunken loon at the moment. **

These muslim countries that teach it is good to kill americans and it’s good to funnel money to terrorists and openly permit terrorist camps in their countries. These muslim countries Fear the mafia more than say Jimmy Carter’s hostage rescue attempt in 1979 or the 1993 Bill Clinton world trade center responce.

I would declare bankruptcy against a credit card company but I know if I did it against the mafia I would be dead.

It’s hard to be nice against people who have sworn to kill you.

If you want to wrestle a pig you are going to have to get dirty too.

[Razorsharp]

*Originally posted by BeatenMan *
**These muslim countries that teach it is good to kill americans and it’s good to funnel money to terrorists and openly permit terrorist camps in their countries. These muslim countries Fear the mafia more than say Jimmy Carter’s hostage rescue attempt in 1979 or the 1993 Bill Clinton world trade center responce.
**

But hold on a minute… Iraq was the most secular of the so-called “Muslim countries” and terrorism could more easily be linked to several other countries other than Iraq.

So, what is it that justifies the priority of attacking Iraq first?

[BeatenMan]

*Originally posted by Razorsharp *
**But hold on a minute… Iraq was the most secular of the so-called “Muslim countries” and terrorism could more easily be linked to several other countries other than Iraq.

So, what is it that justifies the priority of attacking Iraq first? **

1. We had a UN resolution
2. He had funded money to terrorist groups in Isreal which means since he had a beef with the USA he would probably fund terrorists that would attack the USA.
3. And the most important, make an example of what can happen if you don’t help the USA with it’s war on terror. Also Saddam made a good wipping boy, plus he deserved it.

[Tee]

*Originally posted by sailor *
**>> How did this work in Afghanistan?

AFghanistan was the home of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda which were, in fact, behind 9/11.

With so much government propaganda some people have lost track of reality. **

They have indeed. Al-Qaida operated out of Iraq, too. So did Hamas, Islamic Jihad…we found Abu Abbas there, and remnants of Abu Nidal’s organization…last year when Lesley Stahl interviewed the one remaining (at large) participant in the first World Trade Center bombings, Abdul Yasin, guess where she went? And last year a senior executive of USAID in Jordan was gunned down in front of his home in Amman, by militants who say they received this “mission” from one al-Zarqawi in Baghdad. I believe that trial has just begun.

Iraq was like the big rock lying in your backyard, untouched for years…turn it over and the most foul, godawful looking things come slithering out.

[Desmostylus]

*Originally posted by Tee *
Al-Qaida operated out of Iraq, too.

And the evidence for that would be what?

[Ben]

BeatenMan, yes or no:

If Saddam nuked us, would you, as President, lay waste to Iraq with nuclear weapons?

[Tee]

*Originally posted by Desmostylus *
**And the evidence for that would be what? **

…would be demonstrated by what the AG of Australia, for example, considers “close ties” with the Ansar al-Islam camp in Northern Iraq, as in “part of” the al-Qaida network.

http://www.ag.gov.au/www/attorneygeneralHome.nsf/0/E6A17340BAACEC52CA256CF60015BD03?OpenDocument

[BeatenMan]

Yes, Ben this is how war is done.

[Squink]

That’s not rock and roll, it’s genocide.

[BeatenMan]

*Originally posted by Squink *
**That’s not rock and roll, it’s genocide. **

Genocide is a good reason not to nuke the USA with even a dirty bomb. That’s right a country that is insupport of a group hit New York with a dirty bomb I would nuke everything that walked of crawled the earth in every square inch of the attacking country.

[Ben]

You’d kill innocent people?

[casdave]

…and where is this evidence that Iraq had the means to threaten the US ?

We seemd to have moved the debate from wether Iraq had Nuclear weapons to ‘what would the US do if it were attacked with them’, nice slide there.

Doesn’t address the real issue though since Iraq did not have Nuclear weapons, nor the means to deliver, was not going to acquire them in the forseable future, that most of the world was against this in the light of that knowledge, this direction that the debate is taking is all rather moot.

What if the US had a lunatic, lying president that wanted to declare war on a nation that offered no threat(no evidence yet is there?) so he could get access to its resources of oil and at the same time bolster his chances in the next presidencial election?

Of course that is fanciful speculation, couldn’t happen could it?

Its just as good a direction to slide a debate toward if I wanted to avoid the truth though.

[BeatenMan]

*Originally posted by Ben *
**You’d kill innocent people? **

I would kill innocent people to protect the innocent people I am in charge of. Because more of them would be killed at a later date if I did nothing. And letting other countries know ahead of time what I would do would stop any of this from happening.

[BeatenMan]

*Originally posted by casdave *
**…and where is this evidence that Iraq had the means to threaten the US ?

We seemd to have moved the debate from wether Iraq had Nuclear weapons to ‘what would the US do if it were attacked with them’, nice slide there.

Doesn’t address the real issue though since Iraq did not have Nuclear weapons, nor the means to deliver, was not going to acquire them in the forseable future, that most of the world was against this in the light of that knowledge, this direction that the debate is taking is all rather moot.

What if the US had a lunatic, lying president that wanted to declare war on a nation that offered no threat(no evidence yet is there?) so he could get access to its resources of oil and at the same time bolster his chances in the next presidencial election?

Of course that is fanciful speculation, couldn’t happen could it?

Its just as good a direction to slide a debate toward if I wanted to avoid the truth though. **

Bush had the UN mandate that is all he needed. Saddam should never have signed it. Saddam was a wipping boy all the people in the USA know it and all jolly old England knows it. And they are fine with if it.

[Ben]

Well, BeatenMan, if you’re courageous enough to incinerate babies, then surely you’re man enough to defend your beliefs in the Pit.

[PatriotX]

*Originally posted by BeatenMan *
** 2. He had funded money to terrorist groups in Isreal which means since he had a beef with the USA he would probably fund terrorists that would attack the USA.
**

You don’t recognize the deterrent value of the most powerful military force in the history of the world?

[PatriotX]

Ansar al-Islam (AI)
Partisans of Islam
Helpers of Islam
Supporters of Islam
Description

Ansar al-Islam is a radical Islamist group of Iraqi Kurds and Arabs who have vowed to establish an independent Islamic state in northern Iraq. It was formed in September 2001 and is closely allied with al-Qaida. Its members trained in al-Qaida camps in Afghanistan and now provide safehaven to al-Qaida fighters fleeing Afghanistan. (Ansar al-Islam was designated on 20 February 2003, under E.O. 13224. The UNSCR 1267 Committee designated Ansar al-Islam pursuant to UNSCRs 1267, 1390, and 1455 on 27 February 2003.)
Location/Area of Operation

Ansar al-Islam is based in northern Iraq near the Iranian border outside Baghdad’s control.

Pretty weak-ass evidence, Tee. You’re asking us to believe that Hussein was in league with a group that was operating out of the US controlled areas of Iraq that wanted to establish a separate Kurdish state in Iraq.

The 9-11 hijackers were trained and located in the USA. Does that mean that the USA was complicit in the 9-11 attacks and linked to al Qaida?

[PatriotX]

Ansar al-Islam (AI)
Partisans of Islam
Helpers of Islam
Supporters of Islam
Description

Ansar al-Islam is a radical Islamist group of Iraqi Kurds and Arabs who have vowed to establish an independent Islamic state in northern Iraq. It was formed in September 2001 and is closely allied with al-Qaida. Its members trained in al-Qaida camps in Afghanistan and now provide safehaven to al-Qaida fighters fleeing Afghanistan. (Ansar al-Islam was designated on 20 February 2003, under E.O. 13224. The UNSCR 1267 Committee designated Ansar al-Islam pursuant to UNSCRs 1267, 1390, and 1455 on 27 February 2003.)
Location/Area of Operation

Ansar al-Islam is based in northern Iraq near the Iranian border outside Baghdad’s control.

Pretty weak-ass evidence, Tee. You’re asking us to believe that Hussein was in league with a group that was operating out of the US controlled areas of Iraq that wanted to establish a separate Kurdish state in Iraq.

The 9-11 hijackers were trained and located in the USA. Does that mean that the USA was complicit in the 9-11 attacks and linked to al Qaida?

[PatriotX]

link
The idea that al-Zarqawi runs a “terrorist network” of his own or that he is the No. 3 figure in al Qaeda is hyperbole. There is no information available that shows that he is anything other than a foot soldier in connection with known al Qaeda operatives. The administration hypothesis is essentially “proof by proximity.” They claim that al-Zarqawi had a group with whom he was operating, and that group could not be functioning in Baghdad without the complicity of Saddam Hussein’s government.

Washington officials also acknowledge that al-Zarqawi had support from a member of the Qatari Royal family, Abdul Karim al-Thani, who hosted him in Qatar. However, Washington officials do not claim that, as with Iraq, these facts show that the Qatari court is also connected to al Qaeda – particularly since the United States depends on Qatar to provide staging support for the U.S. Central Command.

Even if al-Zarqawi had been in touch with Iraqi officials, the idea that he is operating a terrorist training center in Northern Iraq is completely unproved. The training center does exist, and it does have connections to al Qaeda, but it is run by a dissident Kurdish Islamic militant group, Ansar al-Islam. This group is utterly opposed to the Iraqi regime and has no connection to it.

[OliverH]

*Originally posted by BeatenMan *
**1. We had a UN resolution
**

False.

**
2. He had funded money to terrorist groups in Isreal which means since he had a beef with the USA he would probably fund terrorists that would attack the USA.
**

False again. He gave money to the families of terrorists.

**
3. And the most important, make an example of what can happen if you don’t help the USA with it’s war on terror. Also Saddam made a good wipping boy, plus he deserved it. **

Sorry, but the action actually decreased support for US efforts in the war on terror, and fueled support for terrorist groups.

So… do you actually have any factual arguments?