awesomegamer Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 yes but now you always hear on the news about bombings of soiders, they dont seem to like them so much anymore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 They freed the country of Saddam, ok. Nice... People liked... They could've lefted there and less negative effect on US would've been done. But now... Is already a non return situation... If they leave now, the only thing that they will win is no more rejection than already have... But after we got rid of Hussein, that's when the insurgencies started. And now we must save ourselves from the insurgents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korps Commander Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 Of course, the fact that the insurgency started after we attacked Iraq only goes to show that, if we had not attacked Iraq in the first place, things would have been great in the world. Even though Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, that was no reason to lie and say that he had WMDs........................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 Of course, the fact that the insurgency started after we attacked Iraq only goes to show that, if we had not attacked Iraq in the first place, things would have been great in the world. Even though Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, that was no reason to lie and say that he had WMDs........................... We didn't attack Iraq, we helped it. The terrorists and insurgents were the ones attacking Iraq. And we didn't say that Iraq had WMDs, we said that they might have WMDs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korps Commander Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 The insurgents are attacking their own country right after the U.S. liberation of Iraq? That is inane. And if we said they MIGHT have WMDs, that is no reason to go attack them...................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 And if we said they MIGHT have WMDs, that is no reason to go attack them...................... Like I said, we didn't attack them! We went merely to see if they had WMDs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korps Commander Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 We went in with infantry, artillery, tanks, air support, etc...........just to SEE if they had WMDs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 We went in with infantry, artillery, tanks, air support, etc...........just to SEE if they had WMDs? You have to be prepared. I mean, what if there were WMDs eh? You have to be prepared. I mean, imagine a boy scout going into a forest with no wolves, but the boy scout brought a knife to ensure his safety. It is the same case here, but just on a larger scale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korps Commander Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 But if the Boy Scout went to the wolves' den and slaughtered all the wolves because he thinks that they will be a danger? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 But if the Boy Scout went to the wolves' den and slaughtered all the wolves because he thinks that they will be a danger? That deviates from my example. In my example, the wolves represent the WMDs, not the Iraqis. And the Americans aren't killing the Iraqis, they r killing the insurgents and the terrorists. And if they r killing Iraqis, then only the insurgent and terrorist ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerLoss Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 We had scientist over there looking for WMD's for 2 freaking years!! There was an investigation under way about the fact that Bush senior new about AlQuaida threatening us, and the Clinton administration too. Bush used the war in Iraq as a diversion so he couldnt get nailed for having been able to prevent the 9/11 attacks and choosing not too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 We had scientist over there looking for WMD's for 2 freaking years!! Hey! It's not easy to search an entire country for WMDs, even if you had hundreds of people searching. Do you have any idea how big Iraq is?! It's [/b]437,072 freaking kilometres![/b] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awesomegamer Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 most of which is desert, full of caves to hide stuff in... we cant be sure for a fact they still dont exist now, its imposible to search every inch of the place with so much wasteland of desert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhoenixFlame512 Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 most of which is desert, full of caves to hide stuff in... we cant be sure for a fact they still dont exist now, its imposible to search every inch of the place with so much wasteland of desert. My point exactly. I mean, with all those caves, who knows what kind of stuff can be overlooked, even with the most meticulous searchers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korps Commander Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 Exactly. By now, Bush probably is going "oops, there ARE no WMD in Iraq as far as we know. Now what do I do?"....................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.