|
Re:Election 2004
Originally Posted by nonvtec
Why is anybody bringing up Kuwait? You want to bring up Kuwait lets talk about Bush senior totally screwed things up by not taking Saddam out then and allowed terror to ------ even further for the next 14 years. Don't bring up Kuwait in an argument about GW because clearly Saddam should have been out of power a while ago if you want to talk about that.
|
Re:Election 2004
Originally Posted by nonvtec
How is it the United States' responsibility to create a "stable and peaceful" world. How is it any of our business what goes on in Iraq. Saddam was doing stuff to his own people yes, are we going to go into every country in the world to stop them from doing wrong to their own people? Terrorism and Saddam persecuting his people are two different things. Does anybody know about the awful living conditions in every third world country because of dictators and money hungry governments? Are we going to go into there because we don't like it? Iraq committed no act of terror on the United States. If we are going to waste money going into Iraq where is it going to stop? Honestly, where are we going to stop?
when iraq attacked kuwait in 1991. we and the UN defended kuwait. which was our mission them. the terms of the CEASE-FIRE were the saddam does everything we say. OUR TERMS. WE WON. there was no PEACE declared. THE WAR WAS NOT OVER. there was a cease-fire. saddam didn't follow the rules. we have every right in the world to start up the war again. the end. |
Re:Election 2004
Why do we claim that it is a war on terror then? Are we fighting terror or are we going in because Saddam wasn't cooperating. He started letting inspectors back in the week we attacked him. I think I would have less of a problem with the war if Bush didn't play it up as a huge war on terror when it's not.
|
Re:Election 2004
Originally Posted by nonvtec
Why do we claim that it is a war on terror then? Are we fighting terror or are we going in because Saddam wasn't cooperating. He started letting inspectors back in the week we attacked him. I think I would have less of a problem with the war if Bush didn't play it up as a huge war on terror when it's not.
saddam = payin palestinian TERRORISTS families when they have a son blow themselves up. listen to the news about al qaeda in iraq now. there were ties. and there was funding |
Re:Election 2004
He wouldn't be blowing us up if we werent in his country would he?
|
Re:Election 2004
The more and more I look at it the more we sound like Rome. Back in the 400 B.C. they were attacking everything that they thought as a threat and eventually they used that excuse to take over most of Europe for its trading along the Mediterranean sea. They experienced somewhat the same we have (in the respected terms) and eventually they fell. That is just my view on it and I will continue to stay out of this topic! Lol
|
Re:Election 2004
Originally Posted by nonvtec
He wouldn't be blowing us up if we werent in his country would he?
|
Re:Election 2004
Wait, you're saying that he is paying Palestinian terrorists to blow themselves up in Palestine (Israel)? Just making sure I know what I'm arguing about
|
Re:Election 2004
Originally Posted by nonvtec
Wait, you're saying that he is paying Palestinian terrorists to blow themselves up in Palestine (Israel)? Just making sure I know what I'm arguing about
|
Re:Election 2004
That is a different reason, great, he is a terrorist, didn't touch the United states though. The only way we could have the right or did was if he really was breaking the agreement to let inspectors in. And he started to let them back in right as Bush decided to Attack. Sorry if I'm getting you pissed off, I am enjoying this thread for the opportunity to debate and learn some info, thanks for the cooperation. ;)
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:09 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands