The War against the Reign of Tyranny in Iraq will be over quick.
The truth will be then uncovered. Now you can prove to the world that your understanding of the scheme of things is superior to the wild rantings of we warmongers. Sign on to these sentiments now and we will know soon…
***Saddam Hussain has no store of radioactive materials.
***Saddam Hussain has no store of bio-weapons and gasses.
***Saddam Hussain will not use these weapons in defence of his neck because he doesn’t have them.
*** The Iraqi people love Saddam and will fight to a man to continue to live under his brutal control.
find me a single peacenik who says this. We hate him.
As for WMD - they will certainly be found. Die-hard conspiracists will say “they were planted”. I wouldn’t dismiss this; wouldn’t necessarily believe it either.
Your OP doesn’t really introduce a point of debate, but I’d like to address the two possibilities you raise above.
If Iraqi forces DO use chemical weapons against U.S. invasion troops, doesn’t that offer justification of the invasion? Because in that case, Saddan is proving that he had them all along and was hiding them.
Seems that Saddam is presented with an interesting Catch-22.
Wait a minute. If Iraqi forces use chemical weapons against U.S. troops, that would clearly not be planted evidence. Keep in mind that there will be foreign journalists aplenty in the field. French, German, and Russian media will be present to confirm that Iraqi forces do in fact have chemical agents (if Iraq uses them).
IMHO, he has WMDs, and why wouln’t he use them? I mean, we would find them during a long occupation and that would justify our actions. What would he have to lose, so I can see him going out in a blaze of glory.
Conclude? Depends upon the information I’d have available. I will say that I personally consider that the U.S. fabricating post hoc evidence is a veru unlikely situation. Anyone that would propose that to me better have amazingly solid proof in hand from sources we can both agree are reputable.
C’mon Milum, you can do better than that.
Haven’t you got the guts to wager on some real issues, us anti-war folk have been posting on? ~ Latro
First out of the box Latro, I don’t discuss “issues”. The term “issue” is an intellectual dodge that serves to divert and nit-pick the important matters that are considered by reasonable men.
But having “guts”, I’ll wager this…
(1.) Thanks to the US, ten years from now the Iraqi people will be healthy wealthy and free.
(2.) You have yet to thank the Canadians for your country’s own liberation in 1944.
Then answer me this; assuming the US is victorious, and Saddam is killed or captured without using his WMD’s, why didn’t he use them in a last ditch effort to survive? He has nothing to lose, and the the last resort is presumably the most likely time to use such a weapon. If he does not use them, or at least attempt to use them, and evidence that he had them all along is produced post hoc, I would be very, very suspicious.
It’s because he’s bat-shit crazy and you never know what he’ll do, Fear - haven’t you kept up with the evolving stream of reasons from the war-whatever-happens side? He has to be stopped before he does something irrational - like try to survive. If the stuff is used, it will be in an invasion - so let’s have an invasion, right?
Assuming there’s a quick “win”, however that is defined, will the OP be willing to bet on the actual (non-planted) existence of a dangerous store of WMD’s being found there - one the UN couldn’t find but the US Army could? Or will Bush run out the clock until Election Day instead?
It’s become a sort of mantra that Saddam Hussein is a “madman” but no one says why in any credible way.
Let’s see…“he used WMD on his own people,” i.e., he killed a few thousand ethnic minorities – so have dozens of other countries, and their leaders, while sometimes despised or made into heroes, are rarely called madmen.
Ummm…“he invaded Kuwait,” but what self-respecting western democracies haven’t invaded their neighbors other than Canada, and some European nation which invaded parts of Africa and Asia instead…and no madmen there (except King George III, and he wasn’t very successful at warmaking, was he?)
The “Peacepeople” are not saying Saddam has no WMDs. We are (or at least I am) saying that there is insufficient evidence and insufficient justification. If the police searched your house without a warrant and discovered drugs, does that justify the illegal search?
It’s not inconceivable that Iraq has WMD, but same are not currently in a state of readiness for delivery upon an invading force, because they are being hidden.
Hill & Knowlton’s infamous Kuwaiti babies being thrown out of incubators in Gulf War part the 1st? Gulf of Tonkin Resolution?
I’m not saying that any evidence found would be fabricated, I’m just saying that there is certainly precedent for US ante hoc fabrication where it comes to war, and thus anything found should be treated with a serious amount of skepticism. Independent third-party confirmation would be required.
I agree with Furd—It will not be Sadaam himself actually using the weapons; he will pass the orders down the line until they get to the Major or Captain who realizes the U.S. will need someone to lead Iraqi forces in post-war service. He then alerts U.S. forces to the locations of the WMD or deliver them SH’s head on a platter.
***Saddam Hussain has no store of radioactive materials.
Saddam Hussain does not have a working explosive nuclear weapon. Saddam Hussain does not have any weapons of any sort capable of reaching the United States.
***Saddam Hussain has no store of bio-weapons and gasses.
I’m sure he does have chemicle weapons. I have a jug of bleach that could be used as a chemicle weapon under my sink. Saddam does not have any weapons of any sort capable of reaching the United States.
***Saddam Hussain will not use these weapons in defence of his neck because he doesn’t have them.
Saddam has plenty of weapons that can reach invading armies in his country.
*** The Iraqi people love Saddam and will fight to a man to continue to live under his brutal control.
The people of Iraq hate us more than they could possibly hate Saddam. They would rather live under his rule than give up their sovereignty to be an occupied and humiliated colony of the United States, just like the United States would fight against a foreign invader no matter how unpopular a given president might be. However the Iraqi people recognize that fighting against such a clearly superior force is futile. Look forward to lots of guerilla terrorist-style attacks on occupying American forces after the war is done. There will never be peace as long as the United States is there.
We will know soon Peacepeople…Got Balls?
No, actually, I’m a girl.
