Operation Desert Storm Conflict

[EUR_Zaitsev]

HE SUMS UP
Well it's a cruel, cruel world out there.? One thing you may want to noctice though, it was CONSTRUCTIVE.? I pointed out that it weakens your arguments, and how.? I don't pick on spelling or just simple bad grammar.? I was pointing out that you just couldn't make sense of it, AT ALL.


You know what I am not asking guys to agree with me, I am not asking people to take pity and all of a sudden be a liberal, but when its quotes like these wihch happen a lot with BUcc It shows me thatI really AM advanced for my age because even I am not that that Immature. I dont think I have ever called Bucc anything besides pointing out his stance were ill-legit or that they were ignorent.

Why do you say Bondo and I must back up our facts? It is clear, the world can be seen if you guys would open both eyes. How can you back up that 2+2=4? You cant it just is clearly that. To Me, and maybe Bondo thats what it is with many of our arguments It is just in plain view certain things that you guys disagree with and I dont understand how to back things up that make so much sense to me.

Saddam Hussien is a bad man, Back that up
Saddam Hussien helped attack America, Back that up
Tell me with proof we would attack Iraq with no Oil there
Give me proof there was no slaughter in Vietnam like you argued against Bucc (US troops admit to it)

IT IS A FACT:
 (from MD Snpr Post) The countries with less guns have less Homicides, less violent crimes.
IT IS A FACT: That when people are tried in the US as Saddam would potentially be for aiding Terrorists that he is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN guilty
IT IS A FACT: That in all of Bushes moves he has to care about re-election and now he is Imperialist (maybe thats a coincidence???)
IT IS A FACT: Daddy failed to put the hammer down on Iraq, and failed to get Reeelected, Now Bush wants both (another coincidence?)
IT IS A FACT: That US runs the UN without Collective Security thus defeating the point of the entire system.

I do not blame all of Americas problems on Bush I just feel rather then attacking others we should try to use empathy to see why they attacked us, maybe help the poor, care for our children. How much do you think a Tomahawk Missile costs? A few Million. We cut in half our aresonal of Tomahawk missiles and we have Millians to give to welfare benifits and to clean up the US as a whole. I feel not only Bush but other Politicians shold instead of attack attack attack should try to ensure the well being of the very thing we are defending.

[Brain]

going back to sins last post and his comment about the un. he's completely right, the un lacks the balls to get the job done half the time, and the other half they either half ass the job, or they bow to international pressures before they do what is needed.

it would not supprise me to see the un go the route of the league of nations, i only hope that by that time, they already have another, better, option ready for implementation
 yea that was slightly off tiopc, but i just didnt want to get involved in the other argument going on in this thread

[|MP|Buccaneer]

I dont think I have ever called Bucc anything besides pointing out his stance were ill-legit or that they were ignorent.

Besides calling me ignorant, you also have called me a conservative, and don't actually refute anything I post, you just say it's obvious or clear.  You also have said that you are a lot smarter then me for your age more then once.  Hmmm, so nice to be you I guess.  Can call me a name there and claim you don't.  

Why do you say Bondo and I must back up our facts? It is clear, the world can be seen if you guys would open both eyes. How can you back up that 2+2=4? You cant it just is clearly that. To Me, and maybe Bondo thats what it is with many of our arguments It is just in plain view certain things that you guys disagree with and I dont understand how to back things up that make so much sense to me.

Zaitsev, if you had the common sense to actually read the people that disagree with you's posts, you would see how it isn't clear, why it isn't clear, and why we disagree.  And you would know this if you got off your high horse of "I'm so much smarter then you at this age" and think that, oh, you don't really know that, so maybe you are NOT.

Saddam Hussien is a bad man, Back that up
Saddam Hussien helped attack America, Back that up
Tell me with proof we would attack Iraq with no Oil there
Give me proof there was no slaughter in Vietnam like you argued against Bucc (US troops admit to it)

1) Hussien has killed millions of his own people and Iranians.  He also invaded the country of Kuwait.  I think that qualifies as a "bad man".  This could go on for 10 posts, but you could add his use of chemical weapons against Iran, that he doesn't allow "free" elections.  If you want links, those are easy for me to find.

2) If you had read my previous posts, I'm not for attacking Iraq until that PROOF is SHOWN.  But, since it's more then obvious you don't read, this is more for the people that do.

3) If you had read my posts, or that of others, you would know that when he attacked Kuwait, and threatened Saudi Arabia, we didn't have much choice in the matter.  Not only did we have a treaty with Kuwait to help them in situations like that, but the UN decided to jump right in there too.  Seems like that was a good decision.  I don't care if oil played into it or not.  The fact that we had treaties made it the right thing to do.

4) Again, for the broken record.  READ WHAT I WROTE.  This is getting pointless, just repeating myself because you aren't reading it, or are just ignoring it.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

IT IS A FACT:
 (from MD Snpr Post) The countries with less guns have less Homicides, less violent crimes.

That is a fact that was proven wrong by Bondo's own graphs.  Notice the countries that have the strict gun control and still many more homicides.  Also, countries that have started bans, the vilent crimes went up, not down.

IT IS A FACT: That when people are tried in the US as Saddam would potentially be for aiding Terrorists that he is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN guilty

He would never be tried in the US.  World court maybe, but not the US.  That would be a sham.  Our laws don't apply outside our boarders.  And nobody here has said that there shouldn't be proof.  You'd know that if you actually READ OUR POSTS.

IT IS A FACT: That in all of Bushes moves he has to care about re-election and now he is Imperialist (maybe thats a coincidence???)

Of course he has to care about re-election.  That is one of the pit-falls of democracy.  But where and how is it a fact that he is an "Imperialist"?  There is nothing clear or obvious about that statement.

IT IS A FACT: Daddy failed to put the hammer down on Iraq, and failed to get Reeelected, Now Bush wants both (another coincidence?)

If you are talking about the first Gulf War, oh, the hammer went down.  Their army was beaten to a pulp.  That was one of the few things that Bush did right, and had popular support for (remember, I lived through that as an adult).  Bush didn't get re-elected for many reasons.  The Gulf War was not one of them.

Iraq had 8 years of the Clinton administration to build up some of the infrastructure that we are now worried about.  I don't think that Clinton is at fault about this (maybe just a little, but a very very little).  But in all that time, we were not as strict or hard on Iraq as we were under Bush.  Now we are wondering what they may have gotten away with.

GWB does have a passion about Iraq that I've questioned (again, you'd know this if you READ).  But I don't think it has anything to do with getting re-elected.  Usually it is more a ploy to hide other things.  That is how Clinton used Iraq.  It was his smoke and mirror.  Whenever he was under the microscope for something shaddy here, there would be a flare up there.  

Zaitsev, you are now pretty much falling into what you claim has already happened.  The mock and ignore status.  Until you start READING and ADDRESSING points, instead of telling us that we just badmouth you (when it's obvious from how much I've quoted you that I am addressing your points) well, that's that treatment you are going to get.  Until you start, I'm done reading your posts.  Well, done responding to the points.  I'll probably start mocking them, just so you see what that really is.

[Brain]

IT IS A FACT: Daddy failed to put the hammer down on Iraq, and failed to get Reeelected, Now Bush wants both (another coincidence?)

If you are talking about the first Gulf War, oh, the hammer went down.  Their army was beaten to a pulp.  That was one of the few things that Bush did right, and had popular support for (remember, I lived through that as an adult).  Bush didn't get re-elected for many reasons.  The Gulf War was not one of them.

if i remember correctly it had more to do with the phrase "read my lips, no new taxes"

[Ace]

Saddam Hussien is a bad man, Back that up

He gassed his own people. He invaded a defenseless country. He murders members of his own regime to make sure his power is secure. Need more?

Saddam Hussien helped attack America, Back that up

Bush in his speech said that Iraq helped sponsor terrorism, including Al Qeada. The word of our president works for me. He may not be elqoquent, but he is a simple, honest man.

Tell me with proof we would attack Iraq with no Oil there

There is no way to prove or disprove this unless the status quo remains exactly the same and we wait until the Middle East runs out of oil in however long that may be.

Give me proof there was no slaughter in Vietnam like you argued against Bucc (US troops admit to it)

Like you said before, innocent until proven guilty. If you want to allege that our country committed such atrocities, the burden of proof is on you my friend. (Also just to let you know, slaughtering of the Viet Cong may well have been slaughtering of civilians because they basically were the same.)

[Cossack]

Sadaam is bad no doubt about it. For reasons fiven above,Zaitsev. I would also like to add that Iran gassed Kurds and killed a million Iraqis too. I am just pointing that out, it still dosent take away from the fact that Sadaam is evil.

There is no real proof that Iraq helped attack America. Ace unlike you I dont trust Bush. I do not think he is eloquent and I think he is massivly corrupt. CIA officials FSB/KGB officials, and Mossad officials show differing views and info from what President Bush claims. Blair's dossier is a very weak argument. Wait till we get more proof.

I think that we would not be concerned as much because he would not be threating our oil. Like it or not our oil is in Saudi Arabia, thus we need to defend it.

There were atrocities in Vietnam commited by US forces. Yet do you think the Viet Mihn (Viet Cong is slang for Viet Mihn) were asian angels? They commited horrific atrocities too. No side is innocent in those type of wars. Mujahdeen did it to villages in the 80s My cousin and his squad were forced to burn down a whole village in Afghanistan. No side is innocent in these conflicts.