It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Never Forget Who Started It

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 04:48 AM
Some users will shout again against me, others not.


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 04:54 AM
Mummy! he started it!
No I didn't!
Yes you did!

Who started it? The bloody ape that first gave birth to a human that's who.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 05:04 AM
I`m gonna shout agin ye, but only quietly and only because I think these things don`t encourage learning over a subject just hate.
Think the potato polisher said it well,

" Who started it? The bloody ape that first gave birth to a human that's who."

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 05:16 AM
Get some education to learn who really started, as if 9/11 was the start.... I never knew that humans could be sooooooo ignorant.

The most problems we face today are because humans disability to understand that nothing happens by accident, everything happen for a reason.

To find the roots of the dangers of today you'll have to go back to the late 19th century. If you can find the connections you'll pass for the test. Only then you'll understand who really started this whole thing.

I also wish for the spread of hatred to stop. I don't think it helps to solve the threats. It only make things worse. It's the same thing as the Germans were doing back in the late 1930's we all know the result of that.

Ignore the past and you'll waste the future.

[Edited on 4-4-2003 by TigeriS]


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 05:55 AM
Interestingly 9/11 was unrelated to Iraq. Unless the "who started it" refers to the arab world and implies communal guilt.

Stupid rednecks.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 08:55 AM
The whole world knows who started it. And if any moron says it is NOT for oil but to LIBERATE Iraqi people....well he is a moron anyway.....

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 09:02 AM
is a strange road to go down... In essence, we did, with our foreign policy. However, as to who turned it into direct violence, then yes, arab extremists (and not arabs in general) are the ones who started the violence that led to where we are now.

I disagree that 9/11 has nothing to do with Iraq. After 9/11, it showed as that these extremists aren't just content with terror in Isreal, they want to being it to the US. So, it forced us to look around and re-evaluate who our friends were, and who our enemies are. Inevitably, we turned our eyes to Iraq. Here is a known sponsor and harborer of terrorists. While the terrorists in Iraq may not be officially sanctioned by Saddam, he certainly wasn't making any effort to remove them. We then coupled that with his 12 year refusal to live up to his terms of surrender, and continued stockpiling of weapons. Somehow, after 9/11, watching those who hate us stocking up, gave us a bad feeling....go figure... There are others, to be sure, Syria, Iran, etc. Is this a bold, and possibly bloody route to take? Yes, but they are the ones who brought the fight here...we are the ones who will finish it.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 09:15 AM
I blame the Annunikai... They started it...


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 09:24 AM
This is the crux of where our viewpoints seperate Gazrok. Just to take you point by point.

There is no direct link between 9/11 and Iraq. Even if Saddam did sponsor terrorist regimes other than Al-Qaida, and even if he was still developing and stockpiling chem/bio weapons, there is still no link between this and 9/11, other than links closely associated with paranoia.

The terrorist harbouring and helping thing doesn't stand up. The Al-Ansar group in Northern Iraq were underneath the no fly zones, on the Iranian border, and if they were supported by anyone, it was by Iran.

The WMD argument simply has NO EVIDENCE right now. None at all. Maybe in the next few weeks we'll find some, but even if we do, we're not going to find huge stockpiles, bigger than those held after the first Gulf War. So I wouldn't say there's any evidence of Iraq "stocking up".

They brought the fight to Kuwait 12 years ago. The ceasefire was signed with the UN, therefore it's the UN that decides when it has to come to force. They haven't, and therefore the coalition attack is unjustified. The only link between 9/11 and Iraq, is that the US administration have honed on 9/11 as a good excuse for war with Iraq.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 09:56 AM
"This is the crux of where our viewpoints seperate Gazrok. Just to take you point by point."

It is pretty much where we differ... Why do these threads usually dissolve into us debating each other?

Anyhow, rather than answer point by point. I'll just point out that I believe there is MUCH MUCH more to link Saddam to Al-Queda and similar groups than I've seen in the media. It comes from conversation with some Iraqis who now live here in the states, some of which were in the military. I won't go into details, but I work with many who, like myself, have lived in the middle east, or who were former citizens over there, and it gives me an interesting insight into the situation, that I might not otherwise have, if I were going strictly from media sources... Taken as a whole, I believe the threat to the US from Saddam, and other regimes, to be more dire than I ever would have gleaned from news sources, and that is why I support what's going on. This threat is real, and on many levels, economic, as well as violent, and political.

Do I think Bush has handled it well? No, absolutely not. But I do believe that no matter what happened with inspections, etc., Saddam needs to be ousted from power...and the UN wasn't going to do that. It was going to come to this sooner or later. I would have preferred later, as that would have garnered more support, but so be it...

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 10:07 AM
"Get some education to learn who really started, as if 9/11 was the start.... I never knew that humans could be sooooooo ignorant. "

you arent human?


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 10:13 AM
I guess we're probably the only ones who click refresh regularly!

I respect that you can see that this war has been approached the wrong way. And I certainly haven't spoken to any Iraqi people for quite a while. I did have an Iraqi friend during the first war though, and his opinion was "Saddam is bad, but I don't want my family to get blown up accidentally". Obviously not a direct quote, but that was the impression he gave.

Although Iraqi exiles are probably a source of lots of horror stories, remember that they all have a reason to have left that country, otherwise they'd still be there. I wonder amongst the population of Iraq itself, how many of those people will be happier to be under US control instead of Saddams control. We'll probably find out pretty soon.

Of course, if you're talking to Iraqi exiles who were involved in building up Saddams chemical stockpiles between 1996 and 2003 and channeling funds to terrorists since 1991, then I can understand that you're better educated in this than me.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 10:15 AM
if Saddam did support the terrorists for 911, then how come we went into Afghanistan immediately after? I could have sworn we went there to hunt down OBL for his planning the 911....or am I wrong on that?

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 03:48 PM
was claiming Iraq was directly responsible for 9/11. Instead, what was said, is that we were forced to evaluate who all of our enemies were, and then do something about it.

posted on Apr, 5 2003 @ 06:23 AM
The US started it since a long time ago that dates back 50 years.

They have been invading the world culturally and economically and f....k up a lot of other countries economies.

This is why people who are not US feel a bit of resentment in seeing their way of life and traditions, ability of survival suppressed by the US

posted on Apr, 5 2003 @ 08:59 AM
zaxatron: Exactly!

It's not coincidence that USA has build the most capable navy of the world. It's not exacty for defense. Think about that.

The navy potentiation could be traced back to the end of Secesion War and put those military back on war, this time, with the auspices of William Herbst, against the remains of Spanish Empire of Filipinne Islands, Cuba,... In that time, USA funded the most powerful navy of the world, which gave global political relevance to a country that was great but had none.

posted on Apr, 5 2003 @ 10:07 AM
It's not coincidence that USA has build the most capable navy of the world. It's not exacty for defense. Think about that. Posted by Makodfilu

The US navy was NEVER intended for defence, but for worldwide projection of power. No big secret there.

new topics

top topics


log in