Had Weapons of Mass Destruction actually been recovered or documented with solid evidence, this 'War on Terror' would have been worth it. This however, is not the case and the amount of grief and national debt inflicted upon the United States was not worth the freedom granted to the nation of Iraq.
Sadaam was bad, but....
- Thread starter Brookfield
- Start date
Well said Kchi55. O BTW top Intel poeple even told the president "Iraq ain't worth it they aren't a threat".
Iraq didn't slow terrioism, it speed it up.
One interseting point to note, Saddam didn't like the Bin Laden group and recent Intel has suggested (Even before 9/11) that Saddam had no connections and dissaproved of Bin laden & Friends, and people tell me he supported them.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0211-11.htm
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html
Was it worth it?
Iraq didn't slow terrioism, it speed it up.
One interseting point to note, Saddam didn't like the Bin Laden group and recent Intel has suggested (Even before 9/11) that Saddam had no connections and dissaproved of Bin laden & Friends, and people tell me he supported them.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0211-11.htm
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/033jgqyi.asp
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html
Was it worth it?
DJ-CHRIS1
Golden Master
- Messages
- 5,203
Nik00117 said:
Cuba hasn't done anything bad forever, it's actually a great country. Yes I have been their and I saw more than the tourist stuff. A bit big brotherish but seems okay.
And a single sniper COULD NOT kill saddam, that man has soo much protection.
Hackslayer
Daemon Poster
- Messages
- 819
Nik00117 said:
thats where your wrong you don't even know what he's done in his rain just because the press tells us that he did this and that they make it seem not so bad but only the soilders and people under him know the truth.
as for hitler if you say he wasn't that bad he ordered his men to rape and kill women and cildren that were Jewish and torterd them in many ways.
so know of what you speak before you speak it
Hackslayer
Daemon Poster
- Messages
- 819
Nik00117 said:
Lets ask all the soliders faimlies that have died, civlian contracters brits and americans both, ask them if the pricee they paid to take Saddam was worth it?
They as I would, tell you yes. The price of freedom is high. Paid in blood. On both sides.
Poeple theres the ideal world, and real world. I'm sorry if I was president and the country next to me killed 10,000 poeple, but it'd cos tme 10,000 to take him out, I would ignore it.
You're an isolationist. You would present an ideal target.
This is what we should of done with Saddam, take a Sniper Unit or Navy Seal unit, drop into Iraq near Saddam palace, take him out and go home. Lot cheaper, and a lot less lives lost.
He had so many doubles that if you took one out , the real one would be alerted to the attempt. You wouldn't get another chance.
Had Weapons of Mass Destruction actually been recovered or documented with solid evidence, this 'War on Terror' would have been worth it. This however, is not the case and the amount of grief and national debt inflicted upon the United States was not worth the freedom granted to the nation of Iraq.
Money has been spent. Lives lost. We may or may not have strung along with false pretenses, but we're there and we need to finish the job. Or the money spent and the lives lost will have been in vain.
They as I would, tell you yes. The price of freedom is high. Paid in blood. On both sides.
Poeple theres the ideal world, and real world. I'm sorry if I was president and the country next to me killed 10,000 poeple, but it'd cos tme 10,000 to take him out, I would ignore it.
You're an isolationist. You would present an ideal target.
This is what we should of done with Saddam, take a Sniper Unit or Navy Seal unit, drop into Iraq near Saddam palace, take him out and go home. Lot cheaper, and a lot less lives lost.
He had so many doubles that if you took one out , the real one would be alerted to the attempt. You wouldn't get another chance.
Had Weapons of Mass Destruction actually been recovered or documented with solid evidence, this 'War on Terror' would have been worth it. This however, is not the case and the amount of grief and national debt inflicted upon the United States was not worth the freedom granted to the nation of Iraq.
Money has been spent. Lives lost. We may or may not have strung along with false pretenses, but we're there and we need to finish the job. Or the money spent and the lives lost will have been in vain.
mammikoura
Golden Master
- Messages
- 7,459
I agree with Seti.
1st:
Now that is a little different thing. Is it the same if u die when u are just doing ur daily business at home and then suddenly get gassed just because u are a part of a minority, but u have never done anything that would actually give Saddam the right to kill u.
OR
If u VOLUNTEER to go to Iraq and kick Saddams butt. Ofcourse there are people who are going to protect their leader. All of the soldiers knew that they could get killed (they probably didn't realize what it was like being in a war, but I doubt that they thought that no one could harm them) and they made the choise. If they would have stayed home nothing bad would have happened to them.
It's kinda like a same situation like this one. Say there is a woman and her child living happily in their house. Then some guy comes in and kills them both. Would u feel sad? Would u feel that it was wrong to kill them?
Then say compare that to the 1997 (I think) shootout at Hollywood then the 2 guys went to rob the bank. If u don't know what happened then google it, but in the end both of them got killed. (after shooting at the cops and civilians for over 40 minutes, injuring many) Now do u feel sad about them getting killed? Do u think it was wrong to kill them.
and then:
I thought about that once. Now to be honest this would have been extremely hard to do, possible yes but hard. And lets say that they succeed, and manage to kill Saddam. So the world is a better place and democracy will be accepted in Iraq and the killing of the innocent will stop? No, Saddams son or someone else who was really close to him would take his place and the same kind of stuff would still be happening.
1st:
Nik00117 said:
Now that is a little different thing. Is it the same if u die when u are just doing ur daily business at home and then suddenly get gassed just because u are a part of a minority, but u have never done anything that would actually give Saddam the right to kill u.
OR
If u VOLUNTEER to go to Iraq and kick Saddams butt. Ofcourse there are people who are going to protect their leader. All of the soldiers knew that they could get killed (they probably didn't realize what it was like being in a war, but I doubt that they thought that no one could harm them) and they made the choise. If they would have stayed home nothing bad would have happened to them.
It's kinda like a same situation like this one. Say there is a woman and her child living happily in their house. Then some guy comes in and kills them both. Would u feel sad? Would u feel that it was wrong to kill them?
Then say compare that to the 1997 (I think) shootout at Hollywood then the 2 guys went to rob the bank. If u don't know what happened then google it, but in the end both of them got killed. (after shooting at the cops and civilians for over 40 minutes, injuring many) Now do u feel sad about them getting killed? Do u think it was wrong to kill them.
and then:
Nik00117 said:
I thought about that once. Now to be honest this would have been extremely hard to do, possible yes but hard. And lets say that they succeed, and manage to kill Saddam. So the world is a better place and democracy will be accepted in Iraq and the killing of the innocent will stop? No, Saddams son or someone else who was really close to him would take his place and the same kind of stuff would still be happening.
OP
OP
Brookfield
Golden Master
- Messages
- 10,056
WHAAAAT? he had some put to death by putting them live through a tree shredder!Nik00117 said:
Peter Lachowicz
Daemon Poster
- Messages
- 691
ouch, thats cold, but hitler was just a bit worse, notice the sarcasm, he killed innocent children becuase some of them wore glasses, or were fat, and he didnt only kill jews, the first concentration camps were designed for germans who were rebels. Hitler killed polish people, german people, english, scottish, ikrainain, and lots more, so he didnt even COMPARE to Saddam, fine he killed people in horrendous ways, but he doesnt measure to what hitler did...
