Where in the flying hell are the WMDs in Iraq?!!

Thorn · September 17, 2003, 17:33

Where are they, I demand to see them. President Bush has lied to the American people, and the world. I'd had hoped he'd at least have the intelligence to fabricate some weapons, but nooooooooooo. No weapons anywhere, they must of all fled to North Korea and Iran the government says. Honestly I'm surprised Bush doesn't say they weapons fled to Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.... hell maybe blame it all on France.

A poll said that 70% of americans believe that that Saddam Hussain had a direct link to the attacks on 9/11. Course this poll was from fox news, why I even bother watching it I wonder.... it is the falsest most biased news source I've ever seen on network television.

Now what is he justifying this war on again, bringing democracy to the Iraqi people, humanitarian intervention, perhaps yesterday, today war on terror, what will it be tommorow, regional stability, or perhaps preventative aggression. For a person who is supposed to stick to his guns (which was a major reason he was sorta elected), what is all this utter crap!

SlowwHand · September 17, 2003, 17:39

Syria, as a guess.

Whaleboy · September 17, 2003, 17:42

Thorn:

Welcome to the fold...

Its all unfolding as I and others have said it would. No weapons will materialise, Iraq becomes a source of cheap, educated labour and cheap oil (indirectly). The reasons to go to war were ad hoc and illogical at the best of times, fabricated at worse. In fact, the strongest argument for war, and the only one I cannot refute is economic! All that oil and cheap, educated labour! Could give US economy one hell of a boost. Of course I can refute it by inferring other arguments, but on its own, I cannot counter the validity of the economic argument.

Funny how theyre so keen to deny it!

Bringing democracy to the Iraqi people?!?!? (as dubious a notion as that is)... Bush is living proof that democracy in fact sucks!

Nubclear · September 17, 2003, 17:43

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Syria, as a guess.

IRAQ
|
SYRIA
|
JORDAN, IRAN
|
EGYPT, LIBYA, LEBANON, YEMEN
|
etc etc...

The Andy-Man · September 17, 2003, 17:43

i wish people would stop moaning, i didn't want to war either, but they are there now and weather people like it or not, Iraq is better of, or atleast, Iraqi's are happier, all thats needed is the cash and effort by the USA.

The problem is unwillingness to put the full commitment in.

Whaleboy · September 17, 2003, 17:43

Quote:

Syria, as a guess

Its blatently Canada

Thorn · September 17, 2003, 17:44

Quote:

[SIZE=1] Bringing democracy to the Iraqi people?!?!? (as dubious a notion as that is)... Bush is living proof that democracy in fact sucks!

Well that depends on whether you consider Bush to actually have been elected.

Whaleboy · September 17, 2003, 17:45

Quote:

IRAQ
|
SYRIA
|
(NORTH KOREA)
|
JORDAN, IRAN
|
EGYPT, LIBYA, LEBANON, YEMEN

Its like WW2 pacific island hopping!! These are the countries to fall, in order!

The Andy-Man · September 17, 2003, 17:46

well, democracy isn't great anyway, but in the long run the iraqi economy and society will be much the better for this

Whaleboy · September 17, 2003, 17:47

Quote:

Well that depends on whether you consider Bush to actually have been elected

Thorn · September 17, 2003, 17:48

Quote:

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
well, democracy isn't great anyway, but in the long run the iraqi economy and society will be much the better for this

Funny wasn't the same logic used for the Vietnam war, and we know how better off they ended up?

Nubclear · September 17, 2003, 17:49

Quote:

Originally posted by elijah

Its like WW2 pacific island hopping!! These are the countries to fall, in order!

No, I'm sorry. North Korea posesses nuclear weapons and therefore does not have any weapons of mass destruction.

Please select another nation for invasion.

Whaleboy · September 17, 2003, 17:51

Quote:

well, democracy isn't great anyway, but in the long run the iraqi economy and society will be much the better for this

The problem is that it wont. Culturally its incompatible in this long term (30+ years). As a political system, it wont last much beyond this. It has been shown (somewhere

) that oil-producing states are inherently less stable than multi-faceted economies. Oil will likely be the major export of Iraq, assuming they can clear up the security situation in the next 2 years so the people wont reject the "occupiers", as they see them now, "invaders" as theyll see them then.

Economically speaking of course, it won't be allowed to become truly stable, the US will allow it to be about as stable as the middle east. Put simply, it generates billions in arms sales.

Ming · September 17, 2003, 17:52

Somebody beat you to it earlier today...

http://www.apolyton.net/forums/showt...threadid=97168

Continue any "real" discussions there.