Attack on Iraq.

Does anyone else feel that a pre-emptive strike on Iraq could cause public outrage and possibly give FEMA the chance to excercise its power?

Well, it'd cause ME public outrage, yes.

FEMA? Nah.

"Martial law can be declared during time of increased tension overseas, economic problems within the United States, such as a depression, civil unrest, such as demonstrations or scenes like the Los Angeles riots, and in a drug crisis. "

Thats what gave me the idea, dont know about in America but not too many people here are happy about a strike against Iraq
.Cant really say Im not one of them

FEMA is constantly bad mouthed on this site as well as others. Can people truly say FEMA is bad after 9/11 and the Mississippi floods for example? I seem to recall them helping to thier fullest capacity.

Next, a war such as the proposed attack on Iraq won't spur the public unrest proposed above. I thin that the vast majority of people can see the logic of this attack. If anyone here is unclear as to the reasons why this attack should happen, post here and I will be more than happy to tell you.

I'm all for ousting Saddam and am still confused as to why the organisation which has helped hundreds is seen as the enemy.

Ezekiel, what country are you from? You said not many there are in favor. Over here in the good ol' USA, many of us are for giving Saddam a Paveway enema.

Executive orders giving FEMA extraordinary powers is what gives many the heebie-jeebies.
As far as FEMA and their assistance, I can speak very highly of them for the responses to my areas' problems; floods tornados and, in the past, hurricanes.

I think all this is quite amusing. I've never been a fan of Bush nor will I ever be.

I think one of the reasons why he has focused his attention on ol' S.M. in Iraq is because he has realised that Bin ladan is smarter than he is. All his attempts at catching Bin Ladan have failed. I think he has just given up.

Now he thinks "Let's see, who can I annoy instead of Bin Ladan? I know, I'll annoy Iraq."

Yup. That's it; the leader of the free world is just looking for targets to annoy.

Deep thought, huh?

I really gotta go find a life; find another way to occupy my time. I know! I'll go back to studying conspiracy theories!! Buy and read books! Learn! Clean my weapons, oil my motorcycle chain, anything constructive. Reading some guy's opinion that the President is trying to find someone else to annoy because the military can't find one man in hostile terrain is not the way to spend my time.

DarkDisciple - How much do you know about the matters at hand as well as Iraq's possession of many rather nasty agents? I dunno about you, maybe it's just my point of view, but personally, I don't want a total nutcase to have access to numerous WMDs, which Saddam does. If he is stopped the world will be a safer place, so your comment about annoying people, in this case Iraq, was a rather silly, and uneducated remark.

If you could back it, and my guess is that I can easily shoot down many of the usual points as well as some of the more unusual points, then it would hold more water, not just simply stating that the US is off to annoy another one of those folks off there in the Middle East.

To give you an idea of the destructive potential of a biological weapon, 8 ounces of BTX, which is a secretion released by a certain strain of the botulism toxin, is enough to KILL every living organism on the face of this earth. That's two-thirds of a Fosters that will KILL all life. Fortunately, BTX is incredibly difficult to weaponize, but many of the other agents Saddam has aren't. Granted more of the agent will be required, I'm sure you can imagine the headaches a similar agent could cause if released into a population

LMAO! Thomas! Not at what you said, just the way you said it! You have quite a way with words!