Iraq

[DangerousDan85]

hey Amish, whut up dogg?

[creedfan47a]

To Lechium: Just because certain things happened in the past, it does not mean that it is a NECESSITY for them to happen again. There is no NEED for countless innocent people to die.

You can say that war is a fact of life, but to say it is a necessity is ludicrous.

[Lechium]

Ever heard expressions "history goes in spiral" and "history repetes itself"? Hitstory ALWAYS reptes itself. And yeah millions of innocent people will die. No way around that =

[creedfan47a]

Right. Wars are an unfortunate fact of life. But you say we NEED to have them. That's just ridiculous.

[Steve]

Quote:

Originally posted by creedfan47a
I'm with AW on this one.  Only because I dislike Lechium more.  

But you're right on one thing.  Iraq may be stockpiling 'weapons of mass destruction' but is there any evidence to suggest they are going to be used against the US?  I dunno......

So, Sadaam has weapons of mass destruction but we don't know if he's going to use them on the USA... oh well, just let him be with his weapons that he can use at any time to cause harm to the rest of the world.....

I'm am not supporting the war, but if this man is stockpiling such weapons, he needs to be dealt with. Just because there's no evidence that he's going to use the weapons against us doesn't mean we should sit back and watch him use them against other nations.

Amish said war is not a a necessity. How so? Sometimes its necessary to use excessive force in order to ensure peace. Here's an analogy... it might not be good, but here goes nothing...

There's always going to be someone who is violent in the world. Let's say there's a madman running around your town with a gun and knife trying to kill people. We know he has intent to kill... should our police force go about it's business peacefully, trying to talk this man to turning himself in, even though he has already demonstrated his non-logical, threatening behaviour? Of course not. Using force becomes necessary at times, although it might not be the most peaceful way to handle things, it is necessary to get the job done. Let's just say that I'd much rather live the rest of my life in peace and not have to deal with this lunatic running around with a gun and knife threating to take my life or lives of others I know.

Now exchange madman with Sadam, gun/kinfe with nuclear weapons, and the police with Army.

[Amish Warlord]

France has nukes. Britain has nukes. China has nukes. Russia has nukes. Brazil had nukes. Do we care? no. why do we care so much about sadaam?

as for war being necisarry, may i point you all to a great, great quote by a great, great man.

"can't we all just get along?" - John Lennon


-J

[Lechium]

Lennon was great, but guess no we cant. I truly wish we could thou. I am a pacifist, although I'm thinking about joining Air Force (for financial reasons). Still wars are here to stay. Join protest, join picket lines but you cannot stop human nature.

Oh yeah we care about saddam and his nukes cuz we're friends with France and UK, but not with saddam or northen korea. When your friend buys a gun you're probably cool with that. When someone who realy dislikes you (and you had beaten him up before for barely any reason), gets one you start worrying, right? Same goes with nukes.

[Steve]

Quote:

Originally posted by Amish Warlord
France has nukes.  Britain has nukes.  China has nukes.  Russia has nukes.  Brazil had nukes.  Do we care?  no.  why do we care so much about sadaam?

I posted this once before... why don't we care about about other countries? Because those other countries haven't shown their need to run out and use their nukes in a reckless way. Sadaam, according to the government, has been harboring terrorists and supporting terrorism. Britain isn't a supporter of terrorism. Go back and read the thread where this was discussed (was it on Creed-fanatic board?).

[Bridge of Clay]

Quote:

Originally posted by Amish Warlord
<b>France has nukes. &nbsp;Britain has nukes. &nbsp;China has nukes. &nbsp;Russia has nukes. &nbsp;Brazil had nukes. &nbsp;Do we care? &nbsp;no. &nbsp;why do we care so much about sadaam?

as for war being necisarry, may i point you all to a great, great quote by a great, great man.

"can't we all just get along?" - John Lennon


-J </b>

BRAZIL never had nukes.

[Amish Warlord]

sorry, my mistake, it was late and i was tired. They did have a nuclear program at one point though, but it was scrapped.

-J

[Bridge of Clay]

I agree with Amish on that part above, about war being stupid.

But we all agree Saddam sucks.

About this war being an attempt for getting more oil, there are other sources of fuel that are cheaper. For example: During the 80´s, Brazil launched a program to change gas for alcohol, a non-poluent fuel made of sugar cane´s liquid. It´s way cheaper than oil, sugar cane farms last like forever. Of course, there are thing that alcohol can´t replace gas. But all the money invested on war could be invested in new technology researches.

But since this war is about the threat of terrorism, biological weapons and etc, I think once US has definately prooved to everybody that Iraq holds this weapons, tehy should be destroyed, along with other countrie´s weapons, including US´s.

Today I read on the news about a interview that Time Magazine made with a saudi-arabian prince. He presented a diplomatical strategy to replace Saddam for someone else. Don´t know if Saddam would be arrested, though, but he would "quit his job".

Despite their religious values, I think it´s worthy to release Iraq from a dictatorial goverment where they aren´t allowed to deal with modern life.

[Flip]

Here it is from a UK persons point of view:

1) Sadamm is not well
2) Bush is takeing it personal becuse his dad Did not finsh the job
3)Mr Bliar Will do what he is told *Bilr being my PM*
4)Is it about oil

And oh yeah I am also shitting my self as wwIII could start

[JulieCitySlicker]

Quote:

Originally posted by N30°14'?.7 W84°
speaking on the Bible:

do you remember Babylon ??? That country on Bible which was always creating troubles and wars against everybody else? well... today, Iraq is located where Babylon used to be, years ago.

yep, wars are signs of the times, as hunger, earthquakes, etc.

Brazil´s Foreign Subjects Minister stated that Brazil only would support a war if UN + USA + Iraq run out of every diplomatical means...

to be honest, since our president is on his first month of presidency (is that correct to say?), it was the right &nbsp;decision to make.

I heard about that Babylon and Iraq thing to Ther was another biblical city found where one of our countries is now. I can't remember wich one it was now though

[Bridge of Clay]

Quote:

Originally posted by Amish Warlord
They did have a nuclear program at one point though, but it was scrapped.

no, Brazil´s nuclear program actually was the construction of a few Nuclear Power Plants near Rio de Janeiro. 3 of this plants were built, but one of them is being disabled. The remaining plants don´t work full capacity. Plans are to disactivate both on the near future, since there are alternative sources.

Other Brazilian nuclear interests are restricted to medicine studies.

[Bridge of Clay]

Quote:

Originally posted by JulieLovesCreed
I heard about that Babylon and Iraq thing to &nbsp;Ther was another biblical city found where one of our countries is now. I can't remember wich one it was now though

Israel???

I´ll find it out!