It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

People say Bush should not apologize

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica

Exactly right. It's their country. Not Saddam's country, but the Iraqi people's country. As it stood, they didn't have any say in their government.

Are we forgetting about every election being a 100% vote for Saddam, and anyone who didn't vote for him was executed?


Bummer for them. What if the Iraqi government came over here and tried to dictate policy? It wouldn't go over too well. I don't get to go over to my neighbors home and tell him how to run things, why should the US be able to? Iraq is Iraq, not the United States. We have no right to go over there and tell them how things should be done.

[Edited on 1/29/04 by NotTooHappy]




posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by NotTooHappy

Originally posted by Esoterica

Exactly right. It's their country. Not Saddam's country, but the Iraqi people's country. As it stood, they didn't have any say in their government.

Are we forgetting about every election being a 100% vote for Saddam, and anyone who didn't vote for him was executed?


BNummer for them. What if the Iraqi government came over here and tried to dictate policy? It wouldn't go over too well. I don't get to go over to my neighbors home and tell him how to run things, why should the US be able to?


That's not what you said. What you said was "It's their country."
If it is "their" country, then shouldn't "they" be in charge, not a delusional dictator with a moustache?

And I tell you this: If your neighbor was dipping his kids in battery acid, you sure as # should be over there stopping him.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica


That's not what you said. What you said was "It's their country."
If it is "their" country, then shouldn't "they" be in charge, not a delusional dictator with a moustache?




That's right, it's their country. Let them deal with it.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 05:41 PM
link   
Sure, they should be in charge. And it's up to them to take charge, on their own...without our help. Look what "helping" (if you can call it helping) has done for us! Now we're in their eternal war. Somehow, I don't think that was the result we were looking for. Maybe we should have MINDED OUR OWN #ING BUSINESS!? Do ya think?
They're going to be at war with each other regardless of what we do. Remind me again, why did we want to become part of it? Oh yeah...it's the oil, isn't it?



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I heard a speech on the radio today given by Bill Clinton. Even though I loath to quote anything Slick Willie has to say, he was quoted as saying that as of 1998, there were still WMD in Iraq & that what triggered the four days of bombing that he ordered. He said that since no weapons inspectors could go back into IRAQ (because of Saddam) "They were not sure they got all of them".

You can count me among those who believe there were WMD in IRAQ. Call me naive. but I still think invading Iraq was the right thing.

No, George W. does not owe an apology.

Yes, many people have died in this War. American & Iraqi. But our President does not gas his own people, nor are we excuted for not voting him in office.

Saddam Hussain was a Monster.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 05:52 PM
link   
I heard a speech on the radio today given by Bill Clinton. Even though I loath to quote anything Slick Willie has to say, he was quoted as saying that as of 1998, there were still WMD in Iraq & that what triggered the four days of bombing that he ordered. He said that since no weapons inspectors could go back into IRAQ (because of Saddam) "They were not sure they got all of them".

You can count me among those who believe there were WMD in IRAQ. Call me naive. but I still think invading Iraq was the right thing.

No, George W. does not owe an apology.

Yes, many people have died in this War. American & Iraqi. But our President does not gas his own people, nor are we excuted for not voting him in office.

Saddam Hussain was a Monster.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by NotTooHappy

Originally posted by Esoterica


That's not what you said. What you said was "It's their country."
If it is "their" country, then shouldn't "they" be in charge, not a delusional dictator with a moustache?




That's right, it's their country. Let them deal with it.


They couldn't. They rose up before, and they were slaughtered. In fact, US helicopters WATCHED Saddam killing tribal uprisings, and we did nothing. You know, because it wasn't our concern.

I guess you think the French should have let the US deal with the British on our own? You'd still be saluting the Union Jack if they did.


Sure, they should be in charge. And it's up to them to take charge, on their own...without our help. Look what "helping" (if you can call it helping) has done for us! Now we're in their eternal war. Somehow, I don't think that was the result we were looking for. Maybe we should have MINDED OUR OWN [V] BUSINESS!? Do ya think? They're going to be at war with each other regardless of what we do. Remind me again, why did we want to become part of it? Oh yeah...it's the oil, isn't it?

Eternal war, eh? Yep, 10 months= forever.

And if we wanted oil, we would have made deals with Saddam. You know, like France and Germany did.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
Eternal war, eh? Yep, 10 months= forever.

And if we wanted oil, we would have made deals with Saddam. You know, like France and Germany did.


It's still not over and, it's going to go longer than 10 months. Also, if we had made a deal with Saddam for oil, we(US businesses) still have to pay for it. Invading their country got them the oil for free.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 06:46 PM
link   



It's still not over and, it's going to go longer than 10 months.

I understand that. But he was already sayign that a war that has been going on for 10 months is everlasting. You wanna see an everalsting war, look at Korea. Our boys still get hazard pay when stationed there.

Also, if we had made a deal with Saddam for oil, we(US businesses) still have to pay for it. Invading their country got them the oil for free.

Free? Nothing is free. Price is determined by demand, and how much more someone can afford to pay and still turn a profit. The oil is the Iraqis now, and it will be the Iraqi's when this is over. We still are going to have to pay for it. We just won't have the fellate Saddam to do it.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 06:56 PM
link   
So what you're saying Eso is; that every time a country doesn't act how the US thinks it should, we should invade it. Oh yeah, that makes sense.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by NotTooHappy
So what you're saying Eso is; that every time a country doesn't act how the US thinks it should, we should invade it. Oh yeah, that makes sense.

Iraq was an extreme case. We had helped install Saddam. He was our responsibility. We put him in there, it was our responsibility to get rid of.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
Iraq was an extreme case. We had helped install Saddam. He was our responsibility. We put him in there, it was our responsibility to get rid of.


But we didn't go in there to topple Saddam. We went in there to get his WMDs and the terrorists he harbored, neither of which existed.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 07:07 PM
link   


But we didn't go in there to topple Saddam. We went in there to get his WMDs and the terrorists he harbored, neither of which existed.


I'm glad you can say Hussein had no WMDs when he ahd no proof he had ever destroyed them and Kay has said himself that when we entered Iraq, he had total confidence the weapons were there.

And that was only one reason. It was said many, many times that we were also going in there because the guy was a dick.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
[
I'm glad you can say Hussein had no WMDs when he ahd no proof he had ever destroyed them and Kay has said himself that when we entered Iraq, he had total confidence the weapons were there.

And that was only one reason. It was said many, many times that we were also going in there because the guy was a dick.


Having confidence that they would be there and, them being there are two totally different things.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ladyspiritguide
Yes, many people have died in this War. American & Iraqi. But our President does not gas his own people, nor are we excuted for not voting him in office.

Saddam Hussain was a Monster.

You're buying into that BS? Read this. It's not exactly the way our gov't and media have depicted it. You've only heard the story that makes it easiest to justify calling him a monster. Don't get me wrong, he wasn't a very nice guy, but I really don't think the Kurds were his main target. It was an act of war, and many of the dead were obviously killed by Iranian chemicals. Do some research. Don't just buy the propaganda blindly.

www.g2mil.com...



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
Eternal war, eh? Yep, 10 months= forever.

Ten months???? They've been at war for 2000 years!!! What the hell are you talking about? I wasn't talking about our war. I was talking about their war. We've become part of it, and their war is never going to end.

Oh yeah, BTW, the US is planning on taking as much oil as they think necessary to cover the cost of these wars. Do you still think that's not free oil?
No offense, but you do seem rather naive about this stuff.

[Edited on 1-29-2004 by Satyr]



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by NotTooHappy

Originally posted by Esoterica
[
I'm glad you can say Hussein had no WMDs when he ahd no proof he had ever destroyed them and Kay has said himself that when we entered Iraq, he had total confidence the weapons were there.

And that was only one reason. It was said many, many times that we were also going in there because the guy was a dick.


Having confidence that they would be there and, them being there are two totally different things.


Not when it comes to justification. The question before we went in there was never if Saddam had any weapons. We thought it, the UN thought it, most of the Iraqi military thought it. Saddam made nothing except token gestures to prove his innocence. It would be like everyone on a city block saying some guy has a bomb in his room that he told the police he dismantled. Everybody thinks he has it. He doesn't let the police search his house, he doesn't even release a polaroid showing that the bomb had been taken apart. He just keeps saying he has, and doesn't make any effort outside of that.

So the police storm his place, and can't find a bomb. However, the police were still justified in believing he had the bomb, and having a bomb is justification for entering his home.

Satyr- The only references I see to oil being "spoils of war" are from that are nearly a year old themselves. No word has surfaced after this (unless I couldn't find it, in which case offer a link) that this is still the plan.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 08:47 PM
link   
actually-I am willing to learn the "Truth" about any subject. Especially one this important. I do not follow the "Party Line", and I do my own thinking.


That is why I read everything from: YOU ARE BEING LIED TO-THE DISINFORMATION NEWSLETTER, and still watch FoxNews. I listen to Matt Drudge, and Glenn Beck (I like Matt Drudge a lot better). My point? Everyone gives you a part of the truth, with their own spin.

But bottom line, I am glad Saddam is out of commision. Be it for oil, revenge, or WMD, the point is, he needed to be removed. And he was. Did America have the right to do so? Yeah, I think so, after all, he DID attempt to kill our 41st President, George H. Bush.

That alone makes him an enemy of our country.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
Not when it comes to justification. The question before we went in there was never if Saddam had any weapons. We thought it, the UN thought it, most of the Iraqi military thought it. Saddam made nothing except token gestures to prove his innocence. It would be like everyone on a city block saying some guy has a bomb in his room that he told the police he dismantled. Everybody thinks he has it. He doesn't let the police search his house, he doesn't even release a polaroid showing that the bomb had been taken apart. He just keeps saying he has, and doesn't make any effort outside of that.

So the police storm his place, and can't find a bomb. However, the police were still justified in believing he had the bomb, and having a bomb is justification for entering his home.

Satyr- The only references I see to oil being "spoils of war" are from that are nearly a year old themselves. No word has surfaced after this (unless I couldn't find it, in which case offer a link) that this is still the plan.


What are you talking about??? He let inspectors in. They didn't find anything. We sent them back, they still didn't find anything, the US invaded and pulled out the inspectors. Then, after the US invasion, US inspectors went in. Suprise, they found nothing.
There were inspections before the war. They were from the UN. They found nothing. That's why the UN didn't want to invade Iraq, they saw no reason to since, they had no WMDs.



posted on Jan, 29 2004 @ 09:09 PM
link   
he let the inspectors lookaround a little, After ample time to hide the stuff, if you guys think we shouldnt have gone into Iraq...I suggest you talk to someone that lived under saddam...I have...Bush was right.



new topics




 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join